3 ms·

> high powered rifles with high capacity magazines And you'd be wrong with this assertion again, because the definition of "high powered" and "high capacity" a

by Alupis 4y ago

> high powered rifles with high capacity magazines And you'd be wrong with this assertion again, because the definition of "high powered" and "high capacity" are vastly different for your anti-gun advocates versus reality. A .223 Remington cartridge is not "high powered". A 20 round magazine was what the gun was designed for, making that the standard capacity magazine, not 10 rounds like some advocate for. A .50 BMG could be considered "high powered" - and it's banned in California. However, in California you can purchase .416 Barret, which is even more effective at range than .50 BMG - and it's perfectly legal. Make sense out of that one... > frightening few reasons for folks to have hollow point or incendiary rounds This is a statement made out of ignorance. It's all about the energy transferred into the target. A HP bullet is designed to transfer as much energy into the target as possible to prevent over-penetration (where you shoot someone through a wall accidentally, for instance) and can be considered a safety-feature for defense. You really do not want a reality where people are forced to use FMJ for self defense... > If you buy a lot of the ingredients that go into TNT, expect you will be rightfully checked up on. Look up how to make Anfo. It's not difficult, and the components are not regulated. The use, however, is regulated, ie. it's illegal to make a bomb and blow people up. > Back when I did bird hunt, the entire community would jump on any fool that fired more than the allowed shells in a gun in rapid fire Sport hunting is akin to golf. There are rules for etiquette and "fairness" reasons, even if that seems silly to an outsider. Additionally, at an established gun range, few allow rapid fire unless you are a member. This is for safety reasons, nothing else. Joe walking in off the street with zero firearms training should not be mag-dumping for obvious reasons. > Nobody is hunting with handguns There's an entire community of folks who do just that. We cannot have productive conversations about gun control until anti-gun advocates educate themselves and refrain from abusing and redefining established words.

taeric 4y ago
I'm not wrong, you are just looking to nitpick your way to success here. You are the one poisoning the conversation with supposed mistakes and nitpicks. I could as easily nitpick that arsenic is perfectly fine to feed to people, so that we should not have laws against poisoning. The statement on hollow and incendiary isn't ignorance, it is somewhat flat disbelief that it is typically successful at the things you put forth. I'm well aware of the reasons to try and use them. That said, I'm also well aware that that is never what is accomplished with them. Though, again, I had a question mark on that sentence as I really don't care too much about those. They are, for all practical purposes a side show. And I want you to reread the "that is for safety reasons, nothing else." What the flying fuck do you think we are talking about? Gun safety regulation. Fucking period.
- Alupis 4y ago
  It's a lot like arguing with a child about why the sky is blue. Facts and realities don't apply. Your comments about HP bullets, and particularly incendiary munitions (lol) are absurd and uninformed. But it doesn't matter, you will not educate yourself on the topic no matter how wrong you may be, and therefore we cannot have a productive conversation regarding gun control. The "I fired a gun once, and now I'm an expert" crowd is exhausting. You've spent hundreds of words here, in public, clearly demonstrating your staggeringly poor command of this topic. And gun control advocates always ask, why has no progress been made? Because the conversation is not being held from a rational position.
  - taeric 4y ago
    I find your insistence that you are the rational one laughable, at best. Pedantic, to the extreme, I would give you. Rational? Nope. Children desperately hanging on to their toys. Everyone's health be damned.
    - taeric 4y ago
      On the off chance you come back to this. I would like to apologize for how rude I think I was to the end there. You are clearly prepared with talking points, and this is not a conversation I want to devote too much time to. That is no reason for me to be rude when I am engaged. Apologies.

by Alupis 4y ago

taeric 4y ago

I'm not wrong, you are just looking to nitpick your way to success here. You are the one poisoning the conversation with supposed mistakes and nitpicks. I could as easily nitpick that arsenic is perfectly fine to feed to people, so that we should not have laws against poisoning. The statement on hollow and incendiary isn't ignorance, it is somewhat flat disbelief that it is typically successful at the things you put forth. I'm well aware of the reasons to try and use them. That said, I'm also well aware that that is never what is accomplished with them. Though, again, I had a question mark on that sentence as I really don't care too much about those. They are, for all practical purposes a side show. And I want you to reread the "that is for safety reasons, nothing else." What the flying fuck do you think we are talking about? Gun safety regulation. Fucking period.

Alupis 4y ago
It's a lot like arguing with a child about why the sky is blue. Facts and realities don't apply. Your comments about HP bullets, and particularly incendiary munitions (lol) are absurd and uninformed. But it doesn't matter, you will not educate yourself on the topic no matter how wrong you may be, and therefore we cannot have a productive conversation regarding gun control. The "I fired a gun once, and now I'm an expert" crowd is exhausting. You've spent hundreds of words here, in public, clearly demonstrating your staggeringly poor command of this topic. And gun control advocates always ask, why has no progress been made? Because the conversation is not being held from a rational position.
- taeric 4y ago
  I find your insistence that you are the rational one laughable, at best. Pedantic, to the extreme, I would give you. Rational? Nope. Children desperately hanging on to their toys. Everyone's health be damned.
  - taeric 4y ago
    On the off chance you come back to this. I would like to apologize for how rude I think I was to the end there. You are clearly prepared with talking points, and this is not a conversation I want to devote too much time to. That is no reason for me to be rude when I am engaged. Apologies.