I can tell the author is full of shit by getting no further than the second sentence: They will load their automatic weapons with armor-piercing bullets, strap on silencers, head off to the picnic grounds on nearby public lakes — and start shooting.
Get a legit article please. A very very very very small amount of people own automatic weapons.
You have to read the whole article to get the author's point.
It s full of false information and pure bull shit. People like yourselves who have zero to little knowledge in firearms will believe it, post it as fact, or support it. Halifax I m guessing without google you have no clue how loud a gun would be before or after a silencer is applied.
You can get suppressors super easy in England. Or gun laws should be more like theirs....
So move to England, you d like their very restrictive gun laws. I think all of the firearms I own would be illegal there.
Ah, the old you don't like it move technique.
Throw in the white towel everyone, this guy won't the debate.
I can tell the author is full of shit by getting no further than the second sentence: They will load their automatic weapons with armor-piercing bullets, strap on silencers, head off to the picnic grounds on nearby public lakes — and start shooting.
Get a legit article please. A very very very very small amount of people own automatic weapons.
You have to read the whole article to get the author's point.
It s full of false information and pure bull shit. People like yourselves who have zero to little knowledge in firearms will believe it, post it as fact, or support it. Halifax I m guessing without google you have no clue how loud a gun would be before or after a silencer is applied.
You can get suppressors super easy in England. Or gun laws should be more like theirs....
So move to England, you d like their very restrictive gun laws. I think all of the firearms I own would be illegal there.
Ah, the old you don't like it move technique.
Throw in the white towel everyone, this guy won't the debate.
Ah the old we should change our laws like they have in England. Good one.
I can tell the author is full of shit by getting no further than the second sentence: They will load their automatic weapons with armor-piercing bullets, strap on silencers, head off to the picnic grounds on nearby public lakes — and start shooting.
Get a legit article please. A very very very very small amount of people own automatic weapons.
You have to read the whole article to get the author's point.
It s full of false information and pure bull shit. People like yourselves who have zero to little knowledge in firearms will believe it, post it as fact, or support it. Halifax I m guessing without google you have no clue how loud a gun would be before or after a silencer is applied.
You can get suppressors super easy in England. Or gun laws should be more like theirs....
So move to England, you d like their very restrictive gun laws. I think all of the firearms I own would be illegal there.
I like their lack of daily gun murders and regular mass shootings.
WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16 IL 08/18/18 IL 08/20/18 IT 07/05/2020AT 07/07/2020
HAlifax: I have no problem with silencers since they suppress the decibels not silence them. When you shoot with one it is still loud. armor piercing bullets: I don't even know what that means. Is that based on caliber or grains? I am not versed in that area so I don't have an opinion. Armor piercing sounds like a buzz word simikiar to "hollow point".
I can tell the author is full of shit by getting no further than the second sentence: They will load their automatic weapons with armor-piercing bullets, strap on silencers, head off to the picnic grounds on nearby public lakes — and start shooting.
Get a legit article please. A very very very very small amount of people own automatic weapons.
You have to read the whole article to get the author's point.
It s full of false information and pure bull shit. People like yourselves who have zero to little knowledge in firearms will believe it, post it as fact, or support it. Halifax I m guessing without google you have no clue how loud a gun would be before or after a silencer is applied.
You can get suppressors super easy in England. Or gun laws should be more like theirs....
So move to England, you d like their very restrictive gun laws. I think all of the firearms I own would be illegal there.
Ah, the old you don't like it move technique.
Throw in the white towel everyone, this guy won't the debate.
Ah the old we should change our laws like they have in England. Good one.
Smart people look at what works and try to emulate that. So yeah, good one.
I can tell the author is full of shit by getting no further than the second sentence: They will load their automatic weapons with armor-piercing bullets, strap on silencers, head off to the picnic grounds on nearby public lakes — and start shooting.
Get a legit article please. A very very very very small amount of people own automatic weapons.
You have to read the whole article to get the author's point.
It s full of false information and pure bull shit. People like yourselves who have zero to little knowledge in firearms will believe it, post it as fact, or support it. Halifax I m guessing without google you have no clue how loud a gun would be before or after a silencer is applied.
You can get suppressors super easy in England. Or gun laws should be more like theirs....
So move to England, you d like their very restrictive gun laws. I think all of the firearms I own would be illegal there.
I like their lack of daily gun murders and regular mass shootings.
You'd like England even more since cops don't carry guns! No more police abuse.
HAlifax: I have no problem with silencers since they suppress the decibels not silence them. When you shoot with one it is still loud. armor piercing bullets: I don't even know what that means. Is that based on caliber or grains? I am not versed in that area so I don't have an opinion. Armor piercing sounds like a buzz word simikiar to "hollow point".
Guess your neighborhood doesn't employ gun fire detection devices? Do some research on armor piercing. Body armor not uparmored humvees or vehicle armor. Go on YouTube and watch the California bank robbery shoot out to get a sense of the potential violence unleashed. You okay with that?
HAlifax: I have no problem with silencers since they suppress the decibels not silence them. When you shoot with one it is still loud. armor piercing bullets: I don't even know what that means. Is that based on caliber or grains? I am not versed in that area so I don't have an opinion. Armor piercing sounds like a buzz word simikiar to "hollow point".
Guess your neighborhood doesn't employ gun fire detection devices? Do some research on armor piercing. Body armor not uparmored humvees or vehicle armor. Go on YouTube and watch the California bank robbery shoot out to get a sense of the potential violence unleashed. You okay with that?
No we don't have gun fire detection devices lol. I ll do some research on armor piercing. I am guessing I would be against it since it would have no purpose in defending your family or hunting but politicians create some silly names that aren't exactly accurate.
I can tell the author is full of shit by getting no further than the second sentence: They will load their automatic weapons with armor-piercing bullets, strap on silencers, head off to the picnic grounds on nearby public lakes — and start shooting.
Get a legit article please. A very very very very small amount of people own automatic weapons.
You have to read the whole article to get the author's point.
It s full of false information and pure bull shit. People like yourselves who have zero to little knowledge in firearms will believe it, post it as fact, or support it. Halifax I m guessing without google you have no clue how loud a gun would be before or after a silencer is applied.
You can get suppressors super easy in England. Or gun laws should be more like theirs....
So move to England, you d like their very restrictive gun laws. I think all of the firearms I own would be illegal there.
I like their lack of daily gun murders and regular mass shootings.
You'd like England even more since cops don't carry guns! No more police abuse.
I don't know....I was told if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns.
I'll bet England's violent crime rate is out of control, with thugs gunning down innocent citizens in the streets and what-not.
WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16 IL 08/18/18 IL 08/20/18 IT 07/05/2020AT 07/07/2020
HAlifax: I have no problem with silencers since they suppress the decibels not silence them. When you shoot with one it is still loud. armor piercing bullets: I don't even know what that means. Is that based on caliber or grains? I am not versed in that area so I don't have an opinion. Armor piercing sounds like a buzz word simikiar to "hollow point".
Guess your neighborhood doesn't employ gun fire detection devices? Do some research on armor piercing. Body armor not uparmored humvees or vehicle armor. Go on YouTube and watch the California bank robbery shoot out to get a sense of the potential violence unleashed. You okay with that?
Something with metro California and Chicago...just cannot place my finger on it...Pretty sure all of the hunters in TX would have helped the cops in that robbery situation. Police departments are now better equiped to deal with those situations now too, like Robocop, lol No gunfire detection devices around here, but there are a lot of bird hunters here, so there is that.
HAlifax: I have no problem with silencers since they suppress the decibels not silence them. When you shoot with one it is still loud. armor piercing bullets: I don't even know what that means. Is that based on caliber or grains? I am not versed in that area so I don't have an opinion. Armor piercing sounds like a buzz word simikiar to "hollow point".
Guess your neighborhood doesn't employ gun fire detection devices? Do some research on armor piercing. Body armor not uparmored humvees or vehicle armor. Go on YouTube and watch the California bank robbery shoot out to get a sense of the potential violence unleashed. You okay with that?
Something with metro California and Chicago...just cannot place my finger on it...Pretty sure all of the hunters in TX would have helped the cops in that robbery situation. Police departments are now better equiped to deal with those situations now too, like Robocop, lol No gunfire detection devices around here, but there are a lot of bird hunters here, so there is that.
You mean like they did at the biker shoot out? Or when that whack job went hunting for cops? Yea, police departments now need armored vehicles to respond to that because you know, a black president might get elected and come for your guns, LOL.
I agree it's totally stupid to say that guns bought for protection should be locked up. If they're locked up with the ammo kept separate then they aren't really for home defense anymore, so what's the point? Gun advocates know that. They just spew that shit as a defense mechanism.
I believe this came up again recently in response to a kid getting a hold of a gun and accidentally shooting it. I 100% believe guns should be locked up with kids in the house. Most gun owners I personally know who have guns for protections have a small hand gun safe under the bed or near by, which would prevent access from a kid but allow access for self defense. Personally I dont both, I lock all mine up in the safe. But I'm not worried about people breaking in my house in the middle of the night either. I have no problem admitting my gun collection is for sport
Yes, and I think that those whose interest in guns is related to sport/collecting are usually the most responsible gun owners. The thing is, those folks are usually the ones advocating for guns, based on their specialized perspective. I feel like they may often have a somewhat skewed view simply because they are the ones mired in the whole issue of gun safety, while those who are dangerous with guns or doing it irresponsibly are the problem in terms of death and crime stats (though not so much in terms of American gun culture, which is the biggest problem of all).
If you are concerned with the "culture", the best place to start pointing fingers might be Hollywood and toy manufacturers...Many movies show plenty examples of normalized irresponsible gun usage. Hell, even Joe Biden said you should just go outside and fire a gun in the air...which is highly illegal and unsafe. I'll stick with law enforcement professionals for my advise on firearm usage and storage and whether or not the general public should be armed.
And since you added, I'll add a point too... Canada and many other countries are are just as exposed to Hollywood and toy companies as America is, and they don't have this gun culture. So I really don't think this has as much of an impact on the formation of the problem as you think it does. I'm not saying it doesn't play a role, but I'd say that the way Americans in particular respond to or absorb this information because of the gun culture is the issue, not the content on its own.
HAlifax: I have no problem with silencers since they suppress the decibels not silence them. When you shoot with one it is still loud. armor piercing bullets: I don't even know what that means. Is that based on caliber or grains? I am not versed in that area so I don't have an opinion. Armor piercing sounds like a buzz word simikiar to "hollow point".
Guess your neighborhood doesn't employ gun fire detection devices? Do some research on armor piercing. Body armor not uparmored humvees or vehicle armor. Go on YouTube and watch the California bank robbery shoot out to get a sense of the potential violence unleashed. You okay with that?
Something with metro California and Chicago...just cannot place my finger on it...Pretty sure all of the hunters in TX would have helped the cops in that robbery situation. Police departments are now better equiped to deal with those situations now too, like Robocop, lol No gunfire detection devices around here, but there are a lot of bird hunters here, so there is that.
You mean like they did at the biker shoot out? Or when that whack job went hunting for cops? Yea, police departments now need armored vehicles to respond to that because you know, a black president might get elected and come for your guns, LOL.
You've gone off the deep end. I don't remember the incidents that you discussed involving body armor as we were talking about...and what does a black president getting elected and "coming for your guns" have anything to do with anything except you trying to squeeze racism into this discussion? My comment was really about how hunters are able to use better bullets for large/dangerous game that would have dropped these armored thugs fairly quickly. Didn't the police have to go to a local gun store to get a gun to take down the robbers? I remember the situation, just not all that well.
HAlifax: I have no problem with silencers since they suppress the decibels not silence them. When you shoot with one it is still loud. armor piercing bullets: I don't even know what that means. Is that based on caliber or grains? I am not versed in that area so I don't have an opinion. Armor piercing sounds like a buzz word simikiar to "hollow point".
Guess your neighborhood doesn't employ gun fire detection devices? Do some research on armor piercing. Body armor not uparmored humvees or vehicle armor. Go on YouTube and watch the California bank robbery shoot out to get a sense of the potential violence unleashed. You okay with that?
Something with metro California and Chicago...just cannot place my finger on it...Pretty sure all of the hunters in TX would have helped the cops in that robbery situation. Police departments are now better equiped to deal with those situations now too, like Robocop, lol No gunfire detection devices around here, but there are a lot of bird hunters here, so there is that.
You mean like they did at the biker shoot out? Or when that whack job went hunting for cops? Yea, police departments now need armored vehicles to respond to that because you know, a black president might get elected and come for your guns, LOL.
You've gone off the deep end. I don't remember the incidents that you discussed involving body armor as we were talking about...and what does a black president getting elected and "coming for your guns" have anything to do with anything except you trying to squeeze racism into this discussion? My comment was really about how hunters are able to use better bullets for large/dangerous game that would have dropped these armored thugs fairly quickly. Didn't the police have to go to a local gun store to get a gun to take down the robbers? I remember the situation, just not all that well.
How have I gone off the deep end? Please explain. The legislation before congress, on hold since the congressional baseball shooting, legalizes armor piercing bullets. In the bank robbery case and the Texas cop killing frenzy, that capability would have made a horrific situation even worse. Yet you claim it's necessay to take out dangerous game animals? Sure. The pro gun proponents such as yourself constantly point to more guns being the solution, that if everyone were armed, mass shootings wouldn't occur as frequently. Someone on here posted how all the armed hunters would have taken out the bank robbers, the baseball field assailant and I pointed out that the mass shootings perpetrated by the biker gang and the cop killer were not stopped in such a manner. All we heard from the NRA is how Dems will take your guns away, especially Obama because well, he's special or black. I can only imagine if that biker shoot out had been perpetrated by BLM or Nation of Islam gatherers. The Dallas cop killer initially shot from a position that muffled the sound and made it extremely difficult for responding officers to determine the direction of gun fire. Imagine if he had a "silencer?" Sorry these points are lost on you.
There is no reason for a silencer. I don't understand any need for it. I shot and used guns for many years. Use hearing protection. The difference is significant enough to impact being able to clearly tell where shots are being fired from. If a gun is being fired somewhere, it should be clear as day to anyone near it.
gun silencers don't make them anywhere near silent. I think they reduce in the neighborhood of 25-30 db.
I know and I'm not claiming they do. "Silencers" has entered the vernacular. Perhaps you'd prefer if I use the term, "firearm decibel reduction upon discharge device?" Or, "quiet the boom stick upon the boom device." Shhhhhh, I can't hear it.
HAlifax: I have no problem with silencers since they suppress the decibels not silence them. When you shoot with one it is still loud. armor piercing bullets: I don't even know what that means. Is that based on caliber or grains? I am not versed in that area so I don't have an opinion. Armor piercing sounds like a buzz word simikiar to "hollow point".
Guess your neighborhood doesn't employ gun fire detection devices? Do some research on armor piercing. Body armor not uparmored humvees or vehicle armor. Go on YouTube and watch the California bank robbery shoot out to get a sense of the potential violence unleashed. You okay with that?
Something with metro California and Chicago...just cannot place my finger on it...Pretty sure all of the hunters in TX would have helped the cops in that robbery situation. Police departments are now better equiped to deal with those situations now too, like Robocop, lol No gunfire detection devices around here, but there are a lot of bird hunters here, so there is that.
You mean like they did at the biker shoot out? Or when that whack job went hunting for cops? Yea, police departments now need armored vehicles to respond to that because you know, a black president might get elected and come for your guns, LOL.
You've gone off the deep end. I don't remember the incidents that you discussed involving body armor as we were talking about...and what does a black president getting elected and "coming for your guns" have anything to do with anything except you trying to squeeze racism into this discussion? My comment was really about how hunters are able to use better bullets for large/dangerous game that would have dropped these armored thugs fairly quickly. Didn't the police have to go to a local gun store to get a gun to take down the robbers? I remember the situation, just not all that well.
How have I gone off the deep end? Please explain. The legislation before congress, on hold since the congressional baseball shooting, legalizes armor piercing bullets. In the bank robbery case and the Texas cop killing frenzy, that capability would have made a horrific situation even worse. Yet you claim it's necessay to take out dangerous game animals? Sure. The pro gun proponents such as yourself constantly point to more guns being the solution, that if everyone were armed, mass shootings wouldn't occur as frequently. Someone on here posted how all the armed hunters would have taken out the bank robbers, the baseball field assailant and I pointed out that the mass shootings perpetrated by the biker gang and the cop killer were not stopped in such a manner. All we heard from the NRA is how Dems will take your guns away, especially Obama because well, he's special or black. I can only imagine if that biker shoot out had been perpetrated by BLM or Nation of Islam gatherers. The Dallas cop killer initially shot from a position that muffled the sound and made it extremely difficult for responding officers to determine the direction of gun fire. Imagine if he had a "silencer?" Sorry these points are lost on you.
Yeah, more assuming. The silencer would have actually made it easier to have found the Dallas shooter as it still puts out a pretty auditable sound, just not a deafening one. But without one, you have to deal with sound echoing and bouncing off all of the surrounding concrete buildings. As for "armor piercing bullets", most rifle caliber standard hunting rounds will easily penetrate body armor, so limiting "armor piercing rounds" just sounds like a buzzword/dishonest way of trying to limit all ammo. There are some pretty well educated hunters around here that know a hell of a lot more about ballistics, so you may want to leave some of these technicalities for them to explain. You are simply wrong on so many fronts. You are starting to sound like that Colorado "ghost gun guy" trying to push legislation on something that you don't know shit about. You seem well versed and more interested in racism, so why not stick to the threads where that is actually actively being discussed instead of trolling here?
HAlifax: I have no problem with silencers since they suppress the decibels not silence them. When you shoot with one it is still loud. armor piercing bullets: I don't even know what that means. Is that based on caliber or grains? I am not versed in that area so I don't have an opinion. Armor piercing sounds like a buzz word simikiar to "hollow point".
Guess your neighborhood doesn't employ gun fire detection devices? Do some research on armor piercing. Body armor not uparmored humvees or vehicle armor. Go on YouTube and watch the California bank robbery shoot out to get a sense of the potential violence unleashed. You okay with that?
Something with metro California and Chicago...just cannot place my finger on it...Pretty sure all of the hunters in TX would have helped the cops in that robbery situation. Police departments are now better equiped to deal with those situations now too, like Robocop, lol No gunfire detection devices around here, but there are a lot of bird hunters here, so there is that.
You mean like they did at the biker shoot out? Or when that whack job went hunting for cops? Yea, police departments now need armored vehicles to respond to that because you know, a black president might get elected and come for your guns, LOL.
You've gone off the deep end. I don't remember the incidents that you discussed involving body armor as we were talking about...and what does a black president getting elected and "coming for your guns" have anything to do with anything except you trying to squeeze racism into this discussion? My comment was really about how hunters are able to use better bullets for large/dangerous game that would have dropped these armored thugs fairly quickly. Didn't the police have to go to a local gun store to get a gun to take down the robbers? I remember the situation, just not all that well.
How have I gone off the deep end? Please explain. The legislation before congress, on hold since the congressional baseball shooting, legalizes armor piercing bullets. In the bank robbery case and the Texas cop killing frenzy, that capability would have made a horrific situation even worse. Yet you claim it's necessay to take out dangerous game animals? Sure. The pro gun proponents such as yourself constantly point to more guns being the solution, that if everyone were armed, mass shootings wouldn't occur as frequently. Someone on here posted how all the armed hunters would have taken out the bank robbers, the baseball field assailant and I pointed out that the mass shootings perpetrated by the biker gang and the cop killer were not stopped in such a manner. All we heard from the NRA is how Dems will take your guns away, especially Obama because well, he's special or black. I can only imagine if that biker shoot out had been perpetrated by BLM or Nation of Islam gatherers. The Dallas cop killer initially shot from a position that muffled the sound and made it extremely difficult for responding officers to determine the direction of gun fire. Imagine if he had a "silencer?" Sorry these points are lost on you.
I took the deep end comment as a reference to your black president. An example of how race is brought into every discussion, no matter how irrelevant. Presidential debates, politics, police, and now guns, its apparently about race and now any real substance. If its not racist, then its sexist, or homophobic, or something. That argument does get tiring.
There is no reason for a silencer. I don't understand any need for it. I shot and used guns for many years. Use hearing protection. The difference is significant enough to impact being able to clearly tell where shots are being fired from. If a gun is being fired somewhere, it should be clear as day to anyone near it.
I can see useful applications in hunting where you want to be able to hear your surroundings without having to use hearing protection. Still going to be plenty loud, but not deafening. I haven't been around anyone using them on pistols like your pic above, so I cannot contest to the decibel difference it would make on one of those. I would guess they are still fairly noisy though.
HAlifax: I have no problem with silencers since they suppress the decibels not silence them. When you shoot with one it is still loud. armor piercing bullets: I don't even know what that means. Is that based on caliber or grains? I am not versed in that area so I don't have an opinion. Armor piercing sounds like a buzz word simikiar to "hollow point".
Guess your neighborhood doesn't employ gun fire detection devices? Do some research on armor piercing. Body armor not uparmored humvees or vehicle armor. Go on YouTube and watch the California bank robbery shoot out to get a sense of the potential violence unleashed. You okay with that?
Something with metro California and Chicago...just cannot place my finger on it...Pretty sure all of the hunters in TX would have helped the cops in that robbery situation. Police departments are now better equiped to deal with those situations now too, like Robocop, lol No gunfire detection devices around here, but there are a lot of bird hunters here, so there is that.
You mean like they did at the biker shoot out? Or when that whack job went hunting for cops? Yea, police departments now need armored vehicles to respond to that because you know, a black president might get elected and come for your guns, LOL.
You've gone off the deep end. I don't remember the incidents that you discussed involving body armor as we were talking about...and what does a black president getting elected and "coming for your guns" have anything to do with anything except you trying to squeeze racism into this discussion? My comment was really about how hunters are able to use better bullets for large/dangerous game that would have dropped these armored thugs fairly quickly. Didn't the police have to go to a local gun store to get a gun to take down the robbers? I remember the situation, just not all that well.
How have I gone off the deep end? Please explain. The legislation before congress, on hold since the congressional baseball shooting, legalizes armor piercing bullets. In the bank robbery case and the Texas cop killing frenzy, that capability would have made a horrific situation even worse. Yet you claim it's necessay to take out dangerous game animals? Sure. The pro gun proponents such as yourself constantly point to more guns being the solution, that if everyone were armed, mass shootings wouldn't occur as frequently. Someone on here posted how all the armed hunters would have taken out the bank robbers, the baseball field assailant and I pointed out that the mass shootings perpetrated by the biker gang and the cop killer were not stopped in such a manner. All we heard from the NRA is how Dems will take your guns away, especially Obama because well, he's special or black. I can only imagine if that biker shoot out had been perpetrated by BLM or Nation of Islam gatherers. The Dallas cop killer initially shot from a position that muffled the sound and made it extremely difficult for responding officers to determine the direction of gun fire. Imagine if he had a "silencer?" Sorry these points are lost on you.
Yeah, more assuming. The silencer would have actually made it easier to have found the Dallas shooter as it still puts out a pretty auditable sound, just not a deafening one. But without one, you have to deal with sound echoing and bouncing off all of the surrounding concrete buildings. As for "armor piercing bullets", most rifle caliber standard hunting rounds will easily penetrate body armor, so limiting "armor piercing rounds" just sounds like a buzzword/dishonest way of trying to limit all ammo. There are some pretty well educated hunters around here that know a hell of a lot more about ballistics, so you may want to leave some of these technicalities for them to explain. You are simply wrong on so many fronts. You are starting to sound like that Colorado "ghost gun guy" trying to push legislation on something that you don't know shit about. You seem well versed and more interested in racism, so why not stick to the threads where that is actually actively being discussed instead of trolling here?
So why make armor piercing bullets legal? And what am I "assuming?" I guess Only hunters can possibly know anything about guns and associated hardware and legislation, potential or otherwise, or have an opinion? Ignorance is bliss I guess? What is actively being discussed in this thread? I thought it was America's Gun Violence. Sorry that I mistook it for the Only Hunters are Educated About Guns thread. Race factors into everything. Sorry I triggered you. What am I wrong about on so many fronts? Please correct me.
HAlifax: I have no problem with silencers since they suppress the decibels not silence them. When you shoot with one it is still loud. armor piercing bullets: I don't even know what that means. Is that based on caliber or grains? I am not versed in that area so I don't have an opinion. Armor piercing sounds like a buzz word simikiar to "hollow point".
Guess your neighborhood doesn't employ gun fire detection devices? Do some research on armor piercing. Body armor not uparmored humvees or vehicle armor. Go on YouTube and watch the California bank robbery shoot out to get a sense of the potential violence unleashed. You okay with that?
Something with metro California and Chicago...just cannot place my finger on it...Pretty sure all of the hunters in TX would have helped the cops in that robbery situation. Police departments are now better equiped to deal with those situations now too, like Robocop, lol No gunfire detection devices around here, but there are a lot of bird hunters here, so there is that.
You mean like they did at the biker shoot out? Or when that whack job went hunting for cops? Yea, police departments now need armored vehicles to respond to that because you know, a black president might get elected and come for your guns, LOL.
You've gone off the deep end. I don't remember the incidents that you discussed involving body armor as we were talking about...and what does a black president getting elected and "coming for your guns" have anything to do with anything except you trying to squeeze racism into this discussion? My comment was really about how hunters are able to use better bullets for large/dangerous game that would have dropped these armored thugs fairly quickly. Didn't the police have to go to a local gun store to get a gun to take down the robbers? I remember the situation, just not all that well.
How have I gone off the deep end? Please explain. The legislation before congress, on hold since the congressional baseball shooting, legalizes armor piercing bullets. In the bank robbery case and the Texas cop killing frenzy, that capability would have made a horrific situation even worse. Yet you claim it's necessay to take out dangerous game animals? Sure. The pro gun proponents such as yourself constantly point to more guns being the solution, that if everyone were armed, mass shootings wouldn't occur as frequently. Someone on here posted how all the armed hunters would have taken out the bank robbers, the baseball field assailant and I pointed out that the mass shootings perpetrated by the biker gang and the cop killer were not stopped in such a manner. All we heard from the NRA is how Dems will take your guns away, especially Obama because well, he's special or black. I can only imagine if that biker shoot out had been perpetrated by BLM or Nation of Islam gatherers. The Dallas cop killer initially shot from a position that muffled the sound and made it extremely difficult for responding officers to determine the direction of gun fire. Imagine if he had a "silencer?" Sorry these points are lost on you.
Yeah, more assuming. The silencer would have actually made it easier to have found the Dallas shooter as it still puts out a pretty auditable sound, just not a deafening one. But without one, you have to deal with sound echoing and bouncing off all of the surrounding concrete buildings. As for "armor piercing bullets", most rifle caliber standard hunting rounds will easily penetrate body armor, so limiting "armor piercing rounds" just sounds like a buzzword/dishonest way of trying to limit all ammo. There are some pretty well educated hunters around here that know a hell of a lot more about ballistics, so you may want to leave some of these technicalities for them to explain. You are simply wrong on so many fronts. You are starting to sound like that Colorado "ghost gun guy" trying to push legislation on something that you don't know shit about. You seem well versed and more interested in racism, so why not stick to the threads where that is actually actively being discussed instead of trolling here?
So why make armor piercing bullets legal? And what am I "assuming?" I guess Only hunters can possibly know anything about guns and associated hardware and legislation, potential or otherwise, or have an opinion? Ignorance is bliss I guess? What is actively being discussed in this thread? I thought it was America's Gun Violence. Sorry that I mistook it for the Only Hunters are Educated About Guns thread. Race factors into everything. Sorry I triggered you. What am I wrong about on so many fronts? Please correct me.
Others have pointed out why you are wrong on so many fronts. Have you actually read the legislation having to do with "armor piercing rounds"? Totally buzzword bullshit. I'm just saying that you probably shouldn't assume that being pro-gun rights automatically makes someone racist, right leaning, or even republican for that matter. Everything is not always due to the "oh, but we had a black president" bullshit. That legislation would have been fought regardless of the skin color of the president. Some of you are getting ridiculously predictable. No offense to Godfather, but you have become the Godfather of the left. This thread is about gun violence, but you may want to read the context of the comments before just jumping in and spewing nonsense...I really think that you are just pissed that people are allowed to hunt or shoot guns at all...sorry...must be frustrating...
There is no reason for a silencer. I don't understand any need for it. I shot and used guns for many years. Use hearing protection. The difference is significant enough to impact being able to clearly tell where shots are being fired from. If a gun is being fired somewhere, it should be clear as day to anyone near it.
I can see useful applications in hunting where you want to be able to hear your surroundings without having to use hearing protection. Still going to be plenty loud, but not deafening. I haven't been around anyone using them on pistols like your pic above, so I cannot contest to the decibel difference it would make on one of those. I would guess they are still fairly noisy though.
Yes firing a 30.06 without hearing protection is loud as hell. A silencer would definitely be practical in that situation.
Wait a second. Congress is considering legalizing armour piercing bullets?
Seriously?
Holy Christ. If you didn't think the US was f**ked up before with their gun mentality... this should assist you making that determination.
Why the f**k would any country consider legalizing armour piercing bullets for the general public? I said it earlier... holy Christ.
No, the "armor piercing bullets" are bullets that have been widely available forever and most rifle rounds are "armor piercing bullets"...just a good buzzword to scare people...that is all. They are not like those "Lethal Weapon" Hollywood science fiction rounds...busswords buzzwords buzzwords
Wait a second. Congress is considering legalizing armour piercing bullets?
Seriously?
Holy Christ. If you didn't think the US was f**ked up before with their gun mentality... this should assist you making that determination.
Why the f**k would any country consider legalizing armour piercing bullets for the general public? I said it earlier... holy Christ.
No, the "armor piercing bullets" are bullets that have been widely available forever and most rifle rounds are "armor piercing bullets"...just a good buzzword to scare people...that is all. They are not like those "Lethal Weapon" Hollywood science fiction rounds...busswords buzzwords buzzwords
Yeah I think the 30.06 round I fire in my garand (m2) would be considered "armor piercing". It's a buzz word like "hollow point" and "assault rifle". It sounds more scary than it really is.
HAlifax: I have no problem with silencers since they suppress the decibels not silence them. When you shoot with one it is still loud. armor piercing bullets: I don't even know what that means. Is that based on caliber or grains? I am not versed in that area so I don't have an opinion. Armor piercing sounds like a buzz word simikiar to "hollow point".
Guess your neighborhood doesn't employ gun fire detection devices? Do some research on armor piercing. Body armor not uparmored humvees or vehicle armor. Go on YouTube and watch the California bank robbery shoot out to get a sense of the potential violence unleashed. You okay with that?
Something with metro California and Chicago...just cannot place my finger on it...Pretty sure all of the hunters in TX would have helped the cops in that robbery situation. Police departments are now better equiped to deal with those situations now too, like Robocop, lol No gunfire detection devices around here, but there are a lot of bird hunters here, so there is that.
You mean like they did at the biker shoot out? Or when that whack job went hunting for cops? Yea, police departments now need armored vehicles to respond to that because you know, a black president might get elected and come for your guns, LOL.
You've gone off the deep end. I don't remember the incidents that you discussed involving body armor as we were talking about...and what does a black president getting elected and "coming for your guns" have anything to do with anything except you trying to squeeze racism into this discussion? My comment was really about how hunters are able to use better bullets for large/dangerous game that would have dropped these armored thugs fairly quickly. Didn't the police have to go to a local gun store to get a gun to take down the robbers? I remember the situation, just not all that well.
How have I gone off the deep end? Please explain. The legislation before congress, on hold since the congressional baseball shooting, legalizes armor piercing bullets. In the bank robbery case and the Texas cop killing frenzy, that capability would have made a horrific situation even worse. Yet you claim it's necessay to take out dangerous game animals? Sure. The pro gun proponents such as yourself constantly point to more guns being the solution, that if everyone were armed, mass shootings wouldn't occur as frequently. Someone on here posted how all the armed hunters would have taken out the bank robbers, the baseball field assailant and I pointed out that the mass shootings perpetrated by the biker gang and the cop killer were not stopped in such a manner. All we heard from the NRA is how Dems will take your guns away, especially Obama because well, he's special or black. I can only imagine if that biker shoot out had been perpetrated by BLM or Nation of Islam gatherers. The Dallas cop killer initially shot from a position that muffled the sound and made it extremely difficult for responding officers to determine the direction of gun fire. Imagine if he had a "silencer?" Sorry these points are lost on you.
Yeah, more assuming. The silencer would have actually made it easier to have found the Dallas shooter as it still puts out a pretty auditable sound, just not a deafening one. But without one, you have to deal with sound echoing and bouncing off all of the surrounding concrete buildings. As for "armor piercing bullets", most rifle caliber standard hunting rounds will easily penetrate body armor, so limiting "armor piercing rounds" just sounds like a buzzword/dishonest way of trying to limit all ammo. There are some pretty well educated hunters around here that know a hell of a lot more about ballistics, so you may want to leave some of these technicalities for them to explain. You are simply wrong on so many fronts. You are starting to sound like that Colorado "ghost gun guy" trying to push legislation on something that you don't know shit about. You seem well versed and more interested in racism, so why not stick to the threads where that is actually actively being discussed instead of trolling here?
So why make armor piercing bullets legal? And what am I "assuming?" I guess Only hunters can possibly know anything about guns and associated hardware and legislation, potential or otherwise, or have an opinion? Ignorance is bliss I guess? What is actively being discussed in this thread? I thought it was America's Gun Violence. Sorry that I mistook it for the Only Hunters are Educated About Guns thread. Race factors into everything. Sorry I triggered you. What am I wrong about on so many fronts? Please correct me.
Others have pointed out why you are wrong on so many fronts. Have you actually read the legislation having to do with "armor piercing rounds"? Totally buzzword bullshit. I'm just saying that you probably shouldn't assume that being pro-gun rights automatically makes someone racist, right leaning, or even republican for that matter. Everything is not always due to the "oh, but we had a black president" bullshit. That legislation would have been fought regardless of the skin color of the president. Some of you are getting ridiculously predictable. No offense to Godfather, but you have become the Godfather of the left. This thread is about gun violence, but you may want to read the context of the comments before just jumping in and spewing nonsense...I really think that you are just pissed that people are allowed to hunt or shoot guns at all...sorry...must be frustrating...
Clearly you haven't kept up. The legislation I'm referring to lifts restrictions on guns and ammo. The other article I posted speaks to NRA opposition to legislation preventing mentally ill and domestic abusers from legally buying or possessing firearms, both characteristics common among mass shooters. But then again, you projected onto me what you think I am. Guess you have a guilty conscience?
There is no reason for a silencer. I don't understand any need for it. I shot and used guns for many years. Use hearing protection. The difference is significant enough to impact being able to clearly tell where shots are being fired from. If a gun is being fired somewhere, it should be clear as day to anyone near it.
I can see useful applications in hunting where you want to be able to hear your surroundings without having to use hearing protection. Still going to be plenty loud, but not deafening. I haven't been around anyone using them on pistols like your pic above, so I cannot contest to the decibel difference it would make on one of those. I would guess they are still fairly noisy though.
Yes firing a 30.06 without hearing protection is loud as hell. A silencer would definitely be practical in that situation.
I actually suffer from hearing loss in my right ear from shooting rifles without hearing protection. My father and I hunted regularly and I guess he wasn't aware of the damage the guns could do (I certainly wasn't as a young dude).
Don't judge him... everyone else we hunted with never used protection either. It wasn't a deliberately defiant practice... it was lack of knowledge.
HAlifax: I have no problem with silencers since they suppress the decibels not silence them. When you shoot with one it is still loud. armor piercing bullets: I don't even know what that means. Is that based on caliber or grains? I am not versed in that area so I don't have an opinion. Armor piercing sounds like a buzz word simikiar to "hollow point".
Guess your neighborhood doesn't employ gun fire detection devices? Do some research on armor piercing. Body armor not uparmored humvees or vehicle armor. Go on YouTube and watch the California bank robbery shoot out to get a sense of the potential violence unleashed. You okay with that?
Something with metro California and Chicago...just cannot place my finger on it...Pretty sure all of the hunters in TX would have helped the cops in that robbery situation. Police departments are now better equiped to deal with those situations now too, like Robocop, lol No gunfire detection devices around here, but there are a lot of bird hunters here, so there is that.
You mean like they did at the biker shoot out? Or when that whack job went hunting for cops? Yea, police departments now need armored vehicles to respond to that because you know, a black president might get elected and come for your guns, LOL.
You've gone off the deep end. I don't remember the incidents that you discussed involving body armor as we were talking about...and what does a black president getting elected and "coming for your guns" have anything to do with anything except you trying to squeeze racism into this discussion? My comment was really about how hunters are able to use better bullets for large/dangerous game that would have dropped these armored thugs fairly quickly. Didn't the police have to go to a local gun store to get a gun to take down the robbers? I remember the situation, just not all that well.
How have I gone off the deep end? Please explain. The legislation before congress, on hold since the congressional baseball shooting, legalizes armor piercing bullets. In the bank robbery case and the Texas cop killing frenzy, that capability would have made a horrific situation even worse. Yet you claim it's necessay to take out dangerous game animals? Sure. The pro gun proponents such as yourself constantly point to more guns being the solution, that if everyone were armed, mass shootings wouldn't occur as frequently. Someone on here posted how all the armed hunters would have taken out the bank robbers, the baseball field assailant and I pointed out that the mass shootings perpetrated by the biker gang and the cop killer were not stopped in such a manner. All we heard from the NRA is how Dems will take your guns away, especially Obama because well, he's special or black. I can only imagine if that biker shoot out had been perpetrated by BLM or Nation of Islam gatherers. The Dallas cop killer initially shot from a position that muffled the sound and made it extremely difficult for responding officers to determine the direction of gun fire. Imagine if he had a "silencer?" Sorry these points are lost on you.
Yeah, more assuming. The silencer would have actually made it easier to have found the Dallas shooter as it still puts out a pretty auditable sound, just not a deafening one. But without one, you have to deal with sound echoing and bouncing off all of the surrounding concrete buildings. As for "armor piercing bullets", most rifle caliber standard hunting rounds will easily penetrate body armor, so limiting "armor piercing rounds" just sounds like a buzzword/dishonest way of trying to limit all ammo. There are some pretty well educated hunters around here that know a hell of a lot more about ballistics, so you may want to leave some of these technicalities for them to explain. You are simply wrong on so many fronts. You are starting to sound like that Colorado "ghost gun guy" trying to push legislation on something that you don't know shit about. You seem well versed and more interested in racism, so why not stick to the threads where that is actually actively being discussed instead of trolling here?
So why make armor piercing bullets legal? And what am I "assuming?" I guess Only hunters can possibly know anything about guns and associated hardware and legislation, potential or otherwise, or have an opinion? Ignorance is bliss I guess? What is actively being discussed in this thread? I thought it was America's Gun Violence. Sorry that I mistook it for the Only Hunters are Educated About Guns thread. Race factors into everything. Sorry I triggered you. What am I wrong about on so many fronts? Please correct me.
Others have pointed out why you are wrong on so many fronts. Have you actually read the legislation having to do with "armor piercing rounds"? Totally buzzword bullshit. I'm just saying that you probably shouldn't assume that being pro-gun rights automatically makes someone racist, right leaning, or even republican for that matter. Everything is not always due to the "oh, but we had a black president" bullshit. That legislation would have been fought regardless of the skin color of the president. Some of you are getting ridiculously predictable. No offense to Godfather, but you have become the Godfather of the left. This thread is about gun violence, but you may want to read the context of the comments before just jumping in and spewing nonsense...I really think that you are just pissed that people are allowed to hunt or shoot guns at all...sorry...must be frustrating...
Clearly you haven't kept up. The legislation I'm referring to lifts restrictions on guns and ammo. The other article I posted speaks to NRA opposition to legislation preventing mentally ill and domestic abusers from legally buying or possessing firearms, both characteristics common among mass shooters. But then again, you projected onto me what you think I am. Guess you have a guilty conscience?
Comments
Throw in the white towel everyone, this guy won't the debate.
armor piercing bullets: I don't even know what that means. Is that based on caliber or grains? I am not versed in that area so I don't have an opinion. Armor piercing sounds like a buzz word simikiar to "hollow point".
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I'll bet England's violent crime rate is out of control, with thugs gunning down innocent citizens in the streets and what-not.
No gunfire detection devices around here, but there are a lot of bird hunters here, so there is that.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Didn't the police have to go to a local gun store to get a gun to take down the robbers? I remember the situation, just not all that well.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
As for "armor piercing bullets", most rifle caliber standard hunting rounds will easily penetrate body armor, so limiting "armor piercing rounds" just sounds like a buzzword/dishonest way of trying to limit all ammo. There are some pretty well educated hunters around here that know a hell of a lot more about ballistics, so you may want to leave some of these technicalities for them to explain. You are simply wrong on so many fronts. You are starting to sound like that Colorado "ghost gun guy" trying to push legislation on something that you don't know shit about. You seem well versed and more interested in racism, so why not stick to the threads where that is actually actively being discussed instead of trolling here?
Presidential debates, politics, police, and now guns, its apparently about race and now any real substance. If its not racist, then its sexist, or homophobic, or something. That argument does get tiring.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Seriously?
Holy Christ. If you didn't think the US was f**ked up before with their gun mentality... this should assist you making that determination.
Why the f**k would any country consider legalizing armour piercing bullets for the general public? I said it earlier... holy Christ.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I actually suffer from hearing loss in my right ear from shooting rifles without hearing protection. My father and I hunted regularly and I guess he wasn't aware of the damage the guns could do (I certainly wasn't as a young dude).
Don't judge him... everyone else we hunted with never used protection either. It wasn't a deliberately defiant practice... it was lack of knowledge.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/09/politics/gun-rights-group-ad-campaign-armor-piercing-bullet-ban/index.html
Thanks guys. I was getting scared there. I never realized there was absolutely no difference between the ammunition.