Hey Liberals? Guns work!!

[meristem]

 

[whitebb2727]

Is that what that picture was showing? You need a special bolt and barrel for calibers like 458 or 6.5 on an AR-15 platform. You cant just toss in a few 458 rounds into your AR-15 [223/556] and be on your way.

Its the way of the future. You just swap the uppers.

Now the make a bolt carrier group to shoot .22 lr out of the 5.56 upper.

On the .458 and .50 you just swap complete uppers.

Just pull the pin and swap. You are correct. Each upper has the bcg, and barrel, and gas tube.

You just use the same lower.

The thing is you order a 9 round .458 clip but it still holds 30 5.56 rounds.

 

[whitebb2727]

This about sums up the kind of person I'm comfortable with owning and carrying. That scary old guy in the dog park, not so much. Training, forethought, and situation awareness are exactly the factors in favor of you safely carrying. A guy was killed in a theater for throwing popcorn at an old man who turned out to be a retired cop. Maybe I'd be comfortable with him carrying too. My point being that mistakes happen sometimes in spite of the best training. Maybe that retired cop wouldn't have been so quick to pull the trigger if Florida did not have a law in place that allows people to kill others if they get scared. We'll never know but I'm glad I don't live in Florida.

Some people have posted in this thread making noises about how it would be better if everybody carried. That's simply not going to produce a safer society. Not without the kind of training you are talking about. Even then, when I look about me in a packed room or crowded bar, I see quite a few that I'd rather not be packing. Because, mistakes. So, are you thinking that if everybody carried we'd all be safer?

I agree. You can understand my frustration though. I dont want the be punished when I'm a safe carrier.

I don't know what the answer is.

Don't take my love of guns as a callus heart. I hate to see this stuff happen and my heart goes out to those involved in these tragedies.

 

[bravedave]

I read the same thread and cant remember reading anyone who suggested everyone carried a weapon. No, that is not going to produce a safer society. However, reducing guns may reduce gun violence but it will not reduce violence. Assaults and burglaries are much more common in other countries where guns are banned as the thieves have less chance of dying for their crimes.

The 90 year old woman may not be packing but the 32 year old ex marine walking across the street might. And that stops crime. Because reducing the number of weapons and making it harder for legal citizens to own and carry weapons will not reduce it, it will increase it.

Gun ownership in the U.S.has been rising dramatically while gun crime has been going down. Kind if discounts the rationale that less guns would do the sane thing.

 

[ChesusRice]

You were able to own a fully automatic rifle with little effort all the way up until 1986, with use of m16 parts. You could build your own. Now, it requires an SOT license to build and manufacture fully automatic firearms.

 

[Fogdog]

Gun ownership in the U.S.has been rising dramatically while gun crime has been going down. Kind if discounts the rationale that less guns would do the sane thing.

Hmm, what I've read is that gun ownership per household is going DOWN. It tracks with the decline in hunting over the past few decades. More guns doesn't equate to more people owning guns. Gun crime overall is down and by quite a bit. While I don't own and don't want to own a gun, it seems to me that gun violence is more of a political and not a practical issue. For those that claim more guns would make everybody safer, well, no.

I agree. You can understand my frustration though. I dont want the be punished when I'm a safe carrier.

I don't know what the answer is.

Don't take my love of guns as a callus heart. I hate to see this stuff happen and my heart goes out to those involved in these tragedies.

I don't know what the answer is either.

 

[see4]

Its the way of the future. You just swap the uppers.

Now the make a bolt carrier group to shoot .22 lr out of the 5.56 upper.

On the .458 and .50 you just swap complete uppers.

Just pull the pin and swap. You are correct. Each upper has the bcg, and barrel, and gas tube.

You just use the same lower.

The thing is you order a 9 round .458 clip but it still holds 30 5.56 rounds.

Yea, I do that with my registered lower & lightning link. Requires a swap of the entire upper though, not just a barrel swap.

I'd like to get an AI AX 308 with swappable barrel set, but I'm waiting for the price to come down a bit on them. I think ~$5000 is a little pricey yet still.

 

[see4]

Hmm, what I've read is that gun ownership per household is going DOWN. It tracks with the decline in hunting over the past few decades. More guns doesn't equate to more people owning guns. Gun crime overall is down and by quite a bit. While I don't own and don't want to own a gun, it seems to me that gun violence is more of a political and not a practical issue. For those that claim more guns would make everybody safer, well, no.


I don't know what the answer is either.

Hey fog, according to the BATF, gun ownership has increased over the past decade. But I'm also not convinced that more guns equals a safer society, logic simply does not see it that way.

View attachment 3559382

I got one of those.

 

[Fogdog]

I don't claim to know anything, I'm just reading. I googled BATF gun ownership declining. All I saw were references to concealed carry permits are going up and gun production is up. No I didn't spend a lot of time looking but I wouldn't be surprised if there are two studies with conflicting conclsions. I'd be interested in seeing the report you referred to. The study on gun ownership I refer to can be found here: It uses "households with a gun" as the core variable.

http://www.norc.org/PDFs/GSS Reports/GSS_Trends in Gun Ownership_US_1972-2014.pdf

The household ownership of firearms has declined in recent decades. Table 1 (left side) shows that the 31.0% of households reported having a firearm in 2014, essentially tying with 2010 for the lowest level of gun ownership in the last 40-some years. This is a decline of about 17 percentage points from the peak ownership years in 1977-1980. Similarly, Table 1 (right side) indicates that in 2010 and 2014 about 32% of adults lived households having firearms. This was a decline almost 19 percentage points from an average of 51.2% in 1976-1982. Based on an earlier analysis of those who refused to say whether or not there was a firearm in their household,1 the refusers were reallocated as probably living in a household with a firearm or not living in such a household. This allocation indicates that just under 35% of adults lived in a household with a firearm in both 2014 and 2010. This represents a decline of over 16 percentage point from the peak average of 51.1% in 1976-1982.

 

[NLXSK1]

View attachment 3559382

How many have been used?

 

[bravedave]

Hmm, what I've read is that gun ownership per household is going DOWN. It tracks with the decline in hunting over the past few decades. More guns doesn't equate to more people owning guns. Gun crime overall is down and by quite a bit. While I don't own and don't want to own a gun, it seems to me that gun violence is more of a political and not a practical issue. For those that claim more guns would make everybody safer, well, no.


I don't know what the answer is either.

I think you are correct, but only for the last couple of years where it plateaued and went down a bit. I think it swings back this year though as 2015 has shown monthly record purchases. Over 1.9 million background checks for gun puchases in October alone. Every time Obama opens his mouth and stupidly twists terrorist or crazy shooters to expound upon gun control, gun sales spike. Also,and Of course 40% of gun purchases do not hit that database. I grant that these purchases may not increase the number of households but I think will. That figure also ignores all households who have unregistered weapons and people like myself who do not admit ownership to polls.

As to the rest, the foremost authority on the subject, John Lott, has a couple great books on the subject beginning with "More Guns, Less Crime".

 

[Uncle Ben]

Actually it can be. So can, "Buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo".

And in this case, it does not have to be, as it's an acronym.

To be or not to be, that is the question.

 

[Uncle Ben]

We should ban all forks, and spoons cause you know they make people fat.

 

[Padawanbater2]

 

[Uncle Ben]

"Before he was taken out by a drone strike...."

Gotta luv ya and your twisted sista.

 

[Padawanbater2]

"Before he was taken out by a drone strike...."

Gotta luv ya and your twisted sista.

AQ urged their followers in the West to take advantage of American gun laws to commit terrorism - is that something you support or do you think maybe we ought to change that little loophole?

 

[Uncle Ben]

AQ urged their followers in the West to take advantage of American gun laws to commit terrorism - is that something you support or do you think maybe we ought to change that little loophole?

Wait a minute. This jerk off has 10,000 illegal guns and it's about America's left's infatuation with gun control? You really don't think these ragheads give a shit about Obama/Hillary style PC "gun control" drills? The only gun control they are taught and understand is how to operate the piece and use it to kill innocents.

Speaking of gun control.....you're a fuckin' left wing twisted mind wanker that never quits shooting blanks.

 

[Padawanbater2]

Wait a minute. This jerk off has 10,000 illegal guns and it's about America's left's infatruation with gun control? You really don't think these ragheads give a shit about Obama/Hillary style PC "gun control" drills? The only gun control they are taught and understand is how to operate the piece and use it to kill innocents.

Speaking of gun control.....you're a fuckin' left wing twisted mind wanker that never quits shooting blanks.

Do you understand the problem? Instead of going off the rails with another incoherent political diatribe, why not address the issue that allows extremists the means to acquire guns in the West and potentially kill Americans?

If you think your right to own a gun supersedes my right of the expectation of reasonable safety and security, then you're going to be a very sad person when they implement the changes that prove you wrong.

 

[Uncle Ben]

Do you understand the problem? Instead of going off the rails with another incoherent political diatribe, why not address the issue that allows extremists the means to acquire guns in the West and potentially kill Americans?

If you think your right to own a gun supersedes my right of the expectation of reasonable safety and security, then you're going to be a very sad person when they implement the changes that prove you wrong.

Meet me at the range raghead lover.

My right is guaranteed by the 2nd amendment and we Texans don't tolerate radical ragheads.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/04/us/garland-mohammed-drawing-contest-shooting/

 

[Padawanbater2]

Meet me at the range raghead lover.

My right is guaranteed by the 2nd amendment and we Texans don't tolerate ragheads.

You'd be the "raghead lover" by supporting a policy that allows Muslim extremists in the West to acquire guns to potentially kill American citizens

Why are you defending Islam and why do you hate America, LittleBen?