NationStates Jolt Archive

As a side story to the 6 who were arrested in the Ft. Dix plot, we have this:

http://www.poconorecord.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070508/NEWS/70508011

A local marksman remembers the guys with the AK-47s as "bad shots."

Randy Swiden, 59, said he remembers the Russian-speaking men were shooting with 20-round clips rather than the typical three-round clips. They were shooting at 50-yard targets, packs of paper plates and milk jugs, and were missing.


Just because you have a gun, and a magazine that holds many rounds, doesn't mean you'll hit anything at all.

One of the first things I do when teaching people how to shoot is to give them one of my ARs, and a 30-rd magazine, and letting them shoot at a person-sized and shaped silhouette target.

I then say, if you can hit the target just once, I'll give you 100 dollars.

So far, no novice has ever hit the target once.

As a side story to the 6 who were arrested in the Ft. Dix plot, we have this:

http://www.poconorecord.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070508/NEWS/70508011



Just because you have a gun, and a magazine that holds many rounds, doesn't mean you'll hit anything at all.

One of the first things I do when teaching people how to shoot is to give them one of my ARs, and a 30-rd magazine, and letting them shoot at a person-sized and shaped silhouette target.

I then say, if you can hit the target just once, I'll give you 100 dollars.

So far, no novice has ever hit the target once.

You give them an AR15, and promise them 100 dollars if they can hit a target? How far? How is that possible, how can you miss with an AR15?

This thread doesn't follow logic!

I didnt even read the article as just the small bit you posted was so inaccurate that it made it easy for me not to read it. First of, an AK does not take clips it takes magazines, and 2nd, "typical three-round clips" does not make any sense at all.
As for what you normally do, where do you teach, I am in need of money.

One of the first things I do when teaching people how to shoot is to give them one of my ARs, and a 30-rd magazine, and letting them shoot at a person-sized and shaped silhouette target.

I then say, if you can hit the target just once, I'll give you 100 dollars.

So far, no novice has ever hit the target once.

I see you pointedly leave out the detail of its distance.

First of, an AK does not take clips it takes magazines, and 2nd, "typical three-round clips" does not make any sense at all.
Yeah, I don't know much and "typical three-round clips" sounds retarded.

Probably means "three round burst" vs "full auto."

As a side story to the 6 who were arrested in the Ft. Dix plot, we have this:

http://www.poconorecord.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070508/NEWS/70508011



Just because you have a gun, and a magazine that holds many rounds, doesn't mean you'll hit anything at all.

One of the first things I do when teaching people how to shoot is to give them one of my ARs, and a 30-rd magazine, and letting them shoot at a person-sized and shaped silhouette target.

I then say, if you can hit the target just once, I'll give you 100 dollars.

So far, no novice has ever hit the target once.

The AR-15 once sighted is extremely accurate. If someone just used the Iron sights they would hit something. Give me 1 round and I will not miss let alone 30.

As a side story to the 6 who were arrested in the Ft. Dix plot, we have this:

http://www.poconorecord.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070508/NEWS/70508011



Just because you have a gun, and a magazine that holds many rounds, doesn't mean you'll hit anything at all.

One of the first things I do when teaching people how to shoot is to give them one of my ARs, and a 30-rd magazine, and letting them shoot at a person-sized and shaped silhouette target.

I then say, if you can hit the target just once, I'll give you 100 dollars.

So far, no novice has ever hit the target once.

How much are your classes, and can I have a shot at that $100?





/me hides his own AR-15

As a side story to the 6 who were arrested in the Ft. Dix plot, we have this:

http://www.poconorecord.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070508/NEWS/70508011



Just because you have a gun, and a magazine that holds many rounds, doesn't mean you'll hit anything at all.

One of the first things I do when teaching people how to shoot is to give them one of my ARs, and a 30-rd magazine, and letting them shoot at a person-sized and shaped silhouette target.

I then say, if you can hit the target just once, I'll give you 100 dollars.

So far, no novice has ever hit the target once.
Oh bullshit Remote Observer. Someone has to have hit the target. At what distance are we talking for this target of yours, eh?

Oh, by the way, just to let you know...some are already becoming convinced you're Eve Online hiding behind another user name, which I think is frankly ridiculous just as I thought it was ridiculous that Eve was Deep Kimchi.

Sounds like a tpical A-Team episode; we're shooting at you but chances are we're going to miss. Alot.:mp5:

Oh, by the way, just to let you know...some are already becoming convinced you're Eve Online hiding behind another user name, which I think is frankly ridiculous just as I thought it was ridiculous that Eve was Deep Kimchi.

OT...but yeah..I noticed that too.

AFAIK, DK was the type who was not ashamed or embarassed of his views. He was really convinced of his "realpolitik/pragmatic" view (that was the disconcerting part for me). He would never hide his next incarnation. He made it clear that he was Whispering Legs and then something else (I forgot) and then DK. There is simply no reason why he would deny his earlier identities. You can accuse him of being bigotted or biased etc..but not the troll type switching identities and denying it.

As a side story to the 6 who were arrested in the Ft. Dix plot, we have this:

http://www.poconorecord.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070508/NEWS/70508011



Just because you have a gun, and a magazine that holds many rounds, doesn't mean you'll hit anything at all.

One of the first things I do when teaching people how to shoot is to give them one of my ARs, and a 30-rd magazine, and letting them shoot at a person-sized and shaped silhouette target.

of course, it does depend on distance, as well as if you're handing out blanks or not.

I then say, if you can hit the target just once, I'll give you 100 dollars.

So far, no novice has ever hit the target once.
err... yeah. having a gun doesn't make one skilled.

as for their style? probably what my military friend calls "You Put enough lead in the air and you'll hit something."

and while I never fired an ARs, I wouldn't mind taking up your challange.

OT...but yeah..I noticed that too.

AFAIK, DK was the type who was not ashamed or embarassed of his views. He was really convinced of his "realpolitik/pragmatic" view (that was the disconcerting part for me). He would never hide his next incarnation. He made it clear that he was Whispering Legs and then something else (I forgot) and then DK. There is simply no reason why he would deny his earlier identities. You can accuse him of being bigotted or biased etc..but not the troll type switching identities and denying it.

um....he admitted it.

And he clearly is eve online, considering:

a) he hasn't denied it

and

b) he spent 5 pages talking about the game Eve Online

and of course in his admission that he was DK, he also by implication admitted that he lied about several things, including being a lawyer.

So take his "honesty" with a grain of salt.

OT...but yeah..I noticed that too.

AFAIK, DK was the type who was not ashamed or embarassed of his views. He was really convinced of his "realpolitik/pragmatic" view (that was the disconcerting part for me). He would never hide his next incarnation. He made it clear that he was Whispering Legs and then something else (I forgot) and then DK. There is simply no reason why he would deny his earlier identities. You can accuse him of being bigotted or biased etc..but not the troll type switching identities and denying it.

Sierra BTHP was the other one. But right at the end of Eve Online he admitted not only that he was DK, but that DK was actually two or more people and they had several puppets. And right after that admission? Remote Observer came along.

that DK was actually two or more people and they had several puppets.
That aspect of it all kind of freaks me out. It's bad enough when couples start sharing an identity, but when you've got multiple otherwise unconnected people using the same handles it starts sounding like some sort of cult whose sole purpose is to keep me confused and paranoid.

That aspect of it all kind of freaks me out. It's bad enough when couples start sharing an identity, but when you've got multiple otherwise unconnected people using the same handles it starts sounding like some sort of cult whose sole purpose is to keep me confused and paranoid.

Coming from you of all people, that says something.


On topic: You don't need to be a marksman to fire into a crowd.

=
On topic: You don't need to be a marksman to fire into a crowd.
Or to just kill people period.

Probably means "three round burst" vs "full auto."

I don't know about that, as fully automatic AK-47s are extremely difficult to get, especially legally.

The AR-15 once sighted is extremely accurate. If someone just used the Iron sights they would hit something. Give me 1 round and I will not miss let alone 30.

He wasn't talking about someone with even a basic familiarity with weapons. I've taught some of my friends who've never touched a weapon before to shoot on my SKS and AK-47 and they were lucky if they'd hit a pizza box at 40m. They also couldn't hit a 2L bottle at 20m. I got a lot of comments like "Wow, it's not as easy as it looks on TV." Without having a clue about the effects of things like trigger pull and breathing most people generally can't hit the proverbial broad side of a barn.

Or to just kill people period.

No, but it helps. Luckily that Cho kid in Virginia was a shitty shot or else a lot more people would have died.

Anyway, what exactly are you trying to prove, Remote Observer? It's true that just picking up a gun doesn't make you a dangerous killing machine, but given a week of familiarization and a semi-competent trainer and they'd be accurate enough.

Honestly, I think this whole thing with those six guys is being blown completely out of proportion. Crap like this happened a lot in the 90s with right wing militia groups planning to attack military facilities but we didn't shit our collective pants over it. And honestly, I'm willing to bet those militia groups were probably more dangerous than these jokers. At least most of them can shoot.

Sierra BTHP was the other one. But right at the end of Eve Online he admitted not only that he was DK, but that DK was actually two or more people and they had several puppets. And right after that admission? Remote Observer came along.

Wait...what?! Prove this, please, if only because I must have missed this somewhere.

So far as I know, there is no such thing as a three-round burst AK. Just semi auto, or full auto and semi auto.

You mean any idiot can't just pick up a gun and expect to be a great shot?
http://media.urbandictionary.com/image/large/captainobvious-30189.jpg
Captain Obvious to the rescuse!

So far as I know, there is no such thing as a three-round burst AK. Just semi auto, or full auto and semi auto.

Though it probably means all of jack, there was an AK-47 in Metal Gear Solid III. It could be set to a three-round burst, semi-auto, and full-auto...from what I researched after playing the game the weaponry--unlike most video games--was essentially accurate. It's amazing really...the only other video games I can think of that were that close to reality were Metal Gear Solid, Metal Gear Solid II, and S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Shadow of Chernobyll.

Fort Dix.

Say it out loud.

Though it probably means all of jack, there was an AK-47 in Metal Gear Solid III. It could be set to a three-round burst, semi-auto, and full-auto...from what I researched after playing the game the weaponry--unlike most video games--was essentially accurate. It's amazing really...the only other video games I can think of that were that close to reality were Metal Gear Solid, Metal Gear Solid II, and S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Shadow of Chernobyll.

Black (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_%28video_game%29) is supposedly very accurate. Though I can't reconcile the size of some of the magazine with how many rounds they hold. The M16 magazine does not look big enough to have 95 rounds in it.

Though, I've never seen a real M16, nor could I guess at the size of the rounds it fires, so I could be horribly wrong.

Black (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_%28video_game%29) is supposedly very accurate. Though I can't reconcile the size of some of the magazine with how many rounds they hold. The M16 magazine does not look big enough to have 95 rounds in it.

Though, I've never seen a real M16, nor could I guess at the size of the rounds it fires, so I could be horribly wrong.

Well, I've never played Black so I wouldn't know...after all, I did say "think of."

There are 100 round magazines for the M-16, the Beta C-Mag. Kyronea is probably right, most mainstream journalists get their firearms knowledge from "popular culture" rather than troubling themselves with facts. You see the same phenomenon when people claim that a policeman/whatever should have shot a villain in the legs, or shot the gun from his hand, as though such things were possible without a special effects department, or a game author behind the scenes.

There are 100 round magazines for the M-16, the Beta C-Mag. Kyronea is probably right, most mainstream journalists get their firearms knowledge from "popular culture" rather than troubling themselves with facts. You see the same phenomenon when people claim that a policeman/whatever should have shot a villain in the legs, or shot the gun from his hand, as though such things were possible without a special effects department, or a game author behind the scenes.

Tell me about it.

I'm curious...how difficult IS it to shoot someone in the leg or the arm in an attempt to disable them rather than kill them? It is an honest question...I admit to occasionally thinking of this as a course of action, and while those who have actually handled firearms dismiss this immediately, they've never bothered to explain why. As I've never handled a firearm in reality, I am truly curious.

I'm curious...how difficult IS it to shoot someone in the leg or the arm in an attempt to disable them rather than kill them? It is an honest question...I admit to occasionally thinking of this as a course of action, and while those who have actually handled firearms dismiss this immediately, they've never bothered to explain why. As I've never handled a firearm in reality, I am truly curious.

I'm gonna guess because arms and legs are small, where as torsos are large.

Not only are arms and legs small (especially front on), but they are frequently moving. The torso is much larger.

You don't need to have handled a firearm in combat to understand, just look at a running person.

I'm gonna guess because arms and legs are small, where as torsos are large.

Not only are arms and legs small (especially front on), but they are frequently moving. The torso is much larger.

You don't need to have handled a firearm in combat to understand, just look at a running person.

So it's really that simple, huh? It's what I thought the reason was, but I also figured a trained marksman could disable a person anyway despite this...I guess I was wrong.

most mainstream journalists get their firearms knowledge from "popular culture" rather than troubling themselves with facts.

I'd say some instead of most, depends on your field of work, but as a journalist you tend to be in the wrong place at the wrong time a lot, and after a while you have spoken to enough people that knows a lot (police, military) you have at least a general familiarity with your field of work.

If you are a street reporter, you are more or less familiar with guns. Me, alongside other coworkers, learned to identify some weapons, (or calibers) by the sound of the shots, for example. (That is a FAL, that is a 9mm, that is a .38, etc) It is outstanding how different a 7.62 and a 5.56 round sound. Desk journalists, (as I am know, luckily), tend to lack that kind of knowledge. Then again, you need to do a lot of street work to earn a desk one.

Those Beta C-Mags look like drums, I wonder? I have seen M-16s with drum magazines, used by special police forces around here.

And, yes. If you are going to shoot someone, go for the chest. No need to waste accuracy in either increasing letality (going for the head), or decreasing it (going for shoulders, arms, legs). Shooting is supposed to be a defensive manouver, you shouldn't be caring about what happens to the other guy, as long as he gets hit and goes down.

You give them an AR15, and promise them 100 dollars if they can hit a target? How far? How is that possible, how can you miss with an AR15?

This thread doesn't follow logic!

100 yards away.

I'd say some instead of most, depends on your field of work, but as a journalist you tend to be in the wrong place at the wrong time a lot, and after a while you have spoken to enough people that knows a lot (police, military) you have at least a general familiarity with your field of work.

If you are a street reporter, you are more or less familiar with guns. Me, alongside other coworkers, learned to identify some weapons, (or calibers) by the sound of the shots, for example. (That is a FAL, that is a 9mm, that is a .38, etc) It is outstanding how different a 7.62 and a 5.56 round sound. Desk journalists, (as I am know, luckily), tend to lack that kind of knowledge. Then again, you need to do a lot of street work to earn a desk one.

Those Beta C-Mags look like drums, I wonder? I have seen M-16s with drum magazines, used by special police forces around here.

And, yes. If you are going to shoot someone, go for the chest. No need to waste accuracy in either increasing letality (going for the head), or decreasing it (going for shoulders, arms, legs). Shooting is supposed to be a defensive manouver, you shouldn't be caring about what happens to the other guy, as long as he gets hit and goes down.

One of my ARs with a Beta C-Mag.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b283/jtkwon/fun03.jpg

Exactly, those are the same magazines I saw a few months ago.

Just as a side point. I am the only one that see a rifle with that magazine as a big wang with a pair of testicles?

Exactly, those are the same magazines I saw a few months ago.

Just as a side point. I am the only one that see a rifle with that magazine as a big wang with a pair of testicles?

You must be...

I certainly don't.

I'm curious...how difficult IS it to shoot someone in the leg or the arm in an attempt to disable them rather than kill them? It is an honest question...I admit to occasionally thinking of this as a course of action, and while those who have actually handled firearms dismiss this immediately, they've never bothered to explain why. As I've never handled a firearm in reality, I am truly curious.

With a hand gun? Pretty well impossible. Hand guns aren't exactly accurate anyway, and trying to hit a smaller target than necessary just means you'll miss.

There's a reason soldiers and police are taught to shoot center mass. Doing otherwise is begging to miss.

Or to just kill people period.

Or give everyone cause for fear and concern after succesfully getting weapons ont oa military base and shooting anyone at all.

I think if they succeeded in shooting 10 or 100 soldiers,the effect would be the same.
Many people would feel unsafe.

Many would feel demoralized.

Exactly, those are the same magazines I saw a few months ago.

Just as a side point. I am the only one that see a rifle with that magazine as a big wang with a pair of testicles?


No, you are not the only one. I have to wonder if the weapons designers do this on purpose to sell more to those who feel inadequate, or if they are simply men who feel inadequate and then design the gun that way.

No, but it helps. Luckily that Cho kid in Virginia was a shitty shot or else a lot more people would have died.
Like everyone in that room he attacked, oh wait...

You must be...

I certainly don't.

I bet you don't.

Like everyone in that room he attacked, oh wait...



I bet you don't.

from what I read, I was to believe he was a good shot. If I'm not mistaken, most of the people he shot-He was able to put more than one shot in each of them. Hitting over 20 targets,most more than once makes for some pretty good shooting.

The main problem is that no one was shooting back.

I bet you don't.


If a rifle was about being a penile substitute, I would have bought a larger caliber.

5.56mm is a pretty tiny caliber. Aside from its military uses, it's not recommended for game much larger than a squirrel.

If this was about penises, I would own a lot of elephant guns - and I don't own any.

No, you are not the only one. I have to wonder if the weapons designers do this on purpose to sell more to those who feel inadequate, or if they are simply men who feel inadequate and then design the gun that way.

no-its cost and efficiency-nothing else. That gun can hold a large amount of ammo and still be fired while laying on the ground,or planting it on sandbags.

Men dont buy things that look like a cock & balls.

However-People who feel inadequate with themselves speculate constantly as to items being phallic or substitutes for manhood/prowess...etc...

from what I read, I was to believe he was a good shot. If I'm not mistaken, most of the people he shot-He was able to put more than one shot in each of them. Hitting over 20 targets,most more than once makes for some pretty good shooting.

The main problem is that no one was shooting back.

The other thing is that the people the VT guy was shooting were at very close range, and most of them were cowering, waiting for him to kill them.

You'll notice that a lot of people who ran got away.

If a rifle was about being a penile substitute, I would have bought a larger caliber.

5.56mm is a pretty tiny caliber. Aside from its military uses, it's not recommended for game much larger than a squirrel.

If this was about penises, I would own a lot of elephant guns - and I don't own any.


Shit...I have a Winchester .300 mag.

I guess that means my penis is small?

If a rifle was about being a penile substitute, I would have bought a larger caliber.

5.56mm is a pretty tiny caliber.
Out of a 5 pound, 3 and a half foot rifle with a drum..

Aside from its military uses, it's not recommended for game much larger than a squirrel.
This totally averts the idea that it is phallic symbol :rolleyes:

The other thing is that the people the VT guy was shooting were at very close range, and most of them were cowering, waiting for him to kill them.

You'll notice that a lot of people who ran got away.

I agree there, but still, if he walked through a room and shot 20 some off pumkins or water bottles 2 times each, thats still pretty good shooting.

I dont know the stats on how many shots he fired total or how many missed target completely-but he wasnt doing the spray and pray.

Also-was he shooting with a pistol in each hand? That I never heard either.

no-its cost and efficiency-nothing else. That gun can hold a large amount of ammo and still be fired while laying on the ground,or planting it on sandbags.

Men dont buy things that look like a cock & balls.

However-People who feel inadequate with themselves speculate constantly as to items being phallic or substitutes for manhood/prowess...etc...

Men buy things that look like penises all the time.

I don't need manhood, in any case, absolutely no need for that at all. right now, I don't have any, I hope. Yet I speculate about those items a lot.

I see you pointedly leave out the detail of its distance.

Tricky...


Yeah, I don't know much and "typical three-round clips" sounds retarded.

Maybe he meant "three-round bursts".

I agree there, but still, if he walked through a room and shot 20 some off pumkins or water bottles 2 times each, thats still pretty good shooting.

I dont know the stats on how many shots he fired total or how many missed target completely-but he wasnt doing the spray and pray.

Also-was he shooting with a pistol in each hand? That I never heard either.

No, one pistol at a time.

Transitioning to a new pistol when the first one runs dry is faster than reloading. It is also handy in situations where you feel that someone may try to prevent you from reloading.

Wait...what?! Prove this, please, if only because I must have missed this somewhere.

*Cough* (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12514603&postcount=118)

What was the point of this thread? Untrained people with AK-47s are poor shots at fifty yard distances, wow who'd have thought of that. If you were trying to make a point about murders/killing sprees, then how many of those happen with AKs at 50 yard distances? Shorter distances, confined areas, I'd say would be heck of a lot easier.

5.56mm is a pretty tiny caliber. Aside from its military uses, it's not recommended for game much larger than a squirrel.


If a 5.56mm can put down a man, can't it put down stuff like dogs, mustangs and other animals much bigger than squirrels? :confused:

If a 5.56mm can put down a man, can't it put down stuff like dogs, mustangs and other animals much bigger than squirrels? :confused:

It's not recommended for larger game than rodents/varmints, but it will work. In CT, .223 cal/5.56mm is considered too small for deer. The minimum caliber for deer hunting in CT is .243 cal.

Basically, it will take down larger game than rodents/varmints, but 1: it may not kill as quickly and humanely, and 2: because of #1, it means that much further that you might end up having to walk, to retrieve the animal.

Yeah, I don't know much and "typical three-round clips" sounds retarded.Unless there's a bit of confusion as to the gun type... An AKS has the same basic action and design as an AK47 but has an internal magazine which is loaded with a 'stripper' clip... but it's 5 rounds I believe, not 3. Many places have outlawed the AK47 with it's detachable magazine but not the AKS...

Like everyone in that room he attacked, oh wait...

Are you saying everyone in that classroom died? Care to prove it?

from what I read, I was to believe he was a good shot. If I'm not mistaken, most of the people he shot-He was able to put more than one shot in each of them. Hitting over 20 targets,most more than once makes for some pretty good shooting..

From what I read he did put at least 3 bullets in most people, however they were all over their targets. It wasn't from being a good shot, it was from simply putting enough bullets into the air. The whole "throw enough mud at a wall and some of it will stick" thing. Also, his targets were probably extremely close to him, like 5-10m and just hitting someone at that range isn't all that difficult.

Anyway, a lot of you are being rather silly with the "penile replacement" arguments. I suppose it's easier to think that those who disagree with you have mental problems than to actually accept that reasonable people can think differently, but it's still stupid.

*Cough* (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12514603&postcount=118)

Intriguing...but I fail to see where it proves that Remote Observer is an account used by these two trollers. If anything, while he shares a few similiar viewpoints Remote Observer has been quite different in actual behavior and opinions.

I agree there, but still, if he walked through a room and shot 20 some off pumkins or water bottles 2 times each, thats still pretty good shooting.

Yes that would be, but pumpkins and water bottles are much smaller than people.

I dont know the stats on how many shots he fired total or how many missed target completely-but he wasnt doing the spray and pray.

The shooting continued for several minutes, until the police arrived, and the shooter must have shot at least 80-100 rounds.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/6561733.stm

And I'm willing to bet that in said packed environment that some bullets went through multiple people, causing more injuries than the shot count would suggest.

Intriguing...but I fail to see where it proves that Remote Observer is an account used by these two trollers. If anything, while he shares a few similiar viewpoints Remote Observer has been quite different in actual behavior and opinions.

*Shrugs*

My link was only about the DK - Eve Online admission. You may ask Remote Observer yourself if you feel like it.

*Shrugs*

My link was only about the DK - Eve Online admission. You may ask Remote Observer yourself if you feel like it.

The problem with your viewpoint is that we're actually five people who share the same account.

What was the point of this thread? Untrained people with AK-47s are poor shots at fifty yard distances, wow who'd have thought of that. If you were trying to make a point about murders/killing sprees, then how many of those happen with AKs at 50 yard distances? Shorter distances, confined areas, I'd say would be heck of a lot easier.

Indeed. It seems to be an exercise in stating the obvious.

The problem with your viewpoint is that we're actually five people who share the same account.

But.....why?

But.....why?
Schizophrenia, lieing, or just plain dumb.
Even if it's schizophrenia, they should get their own damn account instead of trying to fall back on a bullshit statement of "it's five people sharing one name, you're wrong haha!"

If a 5.56mm can put down a man, can't it put down stuff like dogs, mustangs and other animals much bigger than squirrels? :confused:

Humans aren't very "thick" in the torso.

Bullets have to penetrate to reach vital organs to put animals down.

5.56mm bullets, even the full metal jacket variety, have a tendency to come apart and limit penetration to around 12 to 13 inches - just right for a side shot on a human torso.

Typical 9mm pistol rounds have greater penetration, if they are full metal jacket.

5.56mm won't work on horses, unless you're lucky, or can hit one in the skull - and sometimes, it won't penetrate skulls on large animals.

Dogs, yeah - that would work with 5.56mm. But I would rather have a 243. A more reliable kill.

What you look for in a round is one that will propel a bullet fast enough to reach the target with minimal drop, and hit hard enough to penetrate deeply through any angle in the torso, and hopefully fragment enough or expand enough to make as wide a hole as possible.

5.56mm just doesn't do this on animals with torsos deeper than a human. It's optimized just for people.

Larger rounds may do as much damage to people, but not more (since it's wasted energy out the other side), so 5.56mm is an economical round in terms of weight, size, and performance.

But.....why?

Because we don't feel it's worth it to post under different accounts.

Sounds like a tpical A-Team episode; we're shooting at you but chances are we're going to miss. Alot.:mp5:

The A-Team: Putting enough lead into the air to season all of Rome's food for two hundred years and still missing.

The problem with your viewpoint is that we're actually five people who share the same account.

So remind me, what's my viewpoint again?

So remind me, what's my viewpoint again?

That we're the same person.

Because we don't feel it's worth it to post under different accounts.

You'd save us a lot of confusion, and yourselves a lot of hassle about being someones puppet, or lying just so you can get out of being wrong by claiming it was someone else.

I don't really see any benefit to having one account for multiple people.

The problem with your viewpoint is that we're actually five people who share the same account.

How odd. I guess I see why Eve Online denied he was Deep Kimchi...in a way he would be right, if the poster during those times was not the one who initially registered the account.

So basically it's reverse multi-ing...five into one, eh? So, what, we call you the Borg? Or are you more like the Bokimchi?

That we're the same person.

So, Remote, do you know Deep Kimchi? Send him my regards.

The problem with your viewpoint is that we're actually five people who share the same account.

NSG MPD? :confused:

That we're the same person.
Ah. You misunderstand me then. My viewpoint is that you - as in DK, EO, RO etc - are all the same. If you're one of many people posting behind those names is irrelevant for this part.

*snip* stuff about 5.56 mm* *snip*
So guns that fire 5.56 round are only good for "target shooting" and killing small game and squishy humans?
I feel safer and more positive about gun freedom with every post!

How odd. I guess I see why Eve Online denied he was Deep Kimchi...in a way he would be right, if the poster during those times was not the one who initially registered the account.
If they refuse to separate accounts, no one is allowed to deny anything.

If they refuse to separate accounts, no one is allowed to deny anything.

Aye.

So, Remote Observer, to all of those who inhabit the account: would you please separate yourselves and create distinct entities? Because honestly, if you're not going to hide who you are, why bother creating so many bloody accounts? Stop hiding and admit who you truly are, like the rest of us have. We might disagree with each other, but at the end of the day we're at least honest to ourselves.

So guns that fire 5.56 round are only good for "target shooting" and killing small game and squishy humans?
I feel safer and more positive about gun freedom with every post!

Yes. Of course, since 5.56mm is "optimized" for people, you don't always get the certainty of a kill with a single shot.

Some rounds, such as the 7.62x51mm, do quick, humane kills on deer (as opposed to the 7.62x39mm), and put people down with single shots.

If you're going to have wars, which would you prefer - people dying agonizing deaths from multiple hits, or people who fell as though someone cut the strings of a puppet from a single hit?

no-its cost and efficiency-nothing else. That gun can hold a large amount of ammo and still be fired while laying on the ground,or planting it on sandbags.

Men dont buy things that look like a cock & balls.

However-People who feel inadequate with themselves speculate constantly as to items being phallic or substitutes for manhood/prowess...etc...

Touché.

There is also the fact that guns need barrels, and so automatically have something like a phallic shape. Form follows function, after all.

And the vast majority of people who enjoy guns probably don't have penile size issues, regardless of the size of their gun or rifle. And I'm sure there are a few out there who like guns but don't like the fact that they look a little phallic.

My previous comments should not be taken as a blanket statement about gun owners.

Yes. Of course, since 5.56mm is "optimized" for people, you don't always get the certainty of a kill with a single shot.

Some rounds, such as the 7.62x51mm, do quick, humane kills on deer (as opposed to the 7.62x39mm), and put people down with single shots.

If you're going to have wars, which would you prefer - people dying agonizing deaths from multiple hits, or people who fell as though someone cut the strings of a puppet from a single hit?

Obviously the latter.

Oh, and please do not ignore me.

Touché.

There is also the fact that guns need barrels, and so automatically have something like a phallic shape. Form follows function, after all.

And the vast majority of people who enjoy guns probably don't have penile size issues, regardless of the size of their gun or rifle. And I'm sure there are a few out there who like guns but don't like the fact that they look a little phallic.

My previous comments should not be taken as a blanket statement about gun owners.

I subscribe to the idea that a rifle is an instrument of power, the power of the Jovian thunderbolt - an instrument of life and death.

It receives its moral hue from its owner - not itself. Thus, it is a test for those who wield it.

It may be used to put meat on the table, or to test one's abilities, or to defend oneself against harm.

It can also be misused.

So I don't view it as a penis. I can't kill anyone by pointing my penis at them.