- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What's the best argument against an all out AR ban?
Posted on 11/7/17 at 1:56 am to ShreveportHog94
Posted on 11/7/17 at 1:56 am to ShreveportHog94
quote:
ShreveportHog94
Oh the mental gymnastics that must be going on in your head to rationalize all of the thoughts!
So which is it... is the AR-15 a big, bad, and useful killing machine -OR- is the AR-15 a worthless and weak weapon that could be easily neutralized (remembering that there are somewhere between 5-10 million AR-15s in the USA)
Posted on 11/7/17 at 1:58 am to Obtuse1
This is actually an interesting argument concerning the 5.56 AR platform vs a Glock (19) 9mm.
I can't believe I am contemplating this situation in light of the events but...
The cyclic rate is high enough in both that the finger and reload time will be the limiting factor. The Glock (since we are talking off the shelf and comparing to what the shooter used) has a 10% advantage in mag cap since the Glock high capacity magazine is 33 shots vs 30. Since the shooter used ~450 rounds (based on what I read) that would be one less reload. The Glock is more likely to have a failure to drop free though. The Glock has a lighter trigger pull (stock) than most stock AR platforms so one should have less finger fatigue (actually an issue with 450 rounds in quick succession). The 9mm round would be more effective at short range EXCEPT if the church had pews or other cover one needed to penetrate then the smaller higher velocity round might be an advantage though it would result in more through and throughs.
I think I would choose a AR from the two but don't see a lot of difference as I see advantages and disadvantages for each but honestly no huge difference in the effective rate of fire.
I can't believe I am contemplating this situation in light of the events but...
The cyclic rate is high enough in both that the finger and reload time will be the limiting factor. The Glock (since we are talking off the shelf and comparing to what the shooter used) has a 10% advantage in mag cap since the Glock high capacity magazine is 33 shots vs 30. Since the shooter used ~450 rounds (based on what I read) that would be one less reload. The Glock is more likely to have a failure to drop free though. The Glock has a lighter trigger pull (stock) than most stock AR platforms so one should have less finger fatigue (actually an issue with 450 rounds in quick succession). The 9mm round would be more effective at short range EXCEPT if the church had pews or other cover one needed to penetrate then the smaller higher velocity round might be an advantage though it would result in more through and throughs.
I think I would choose a AR from the two but don't see a lot of difference as I see advantages and disadvantages for each but honestly no huge difference in the effective rate of fire.
Posted on 11/7/17 at 2:00 am to ShreveportHog94
You deftly avoided answering the actual question and issue at hand.
Posted on 11/7/17 at 2:01 am to Obtuse1
Nope. You're wrong. Zero chance you can shoot a semi automatic glock at the same rate as a semi automatic ar15. That isn't how semi autos work. Due to the ergonomics, your rate of fire in the hand gun will be slower than the rifle.
No way in hell you could shoot a full mag out of a glock just as fast as out of an AR. Nope. No way. It's impossible
No way in hell you could shoot a full mag out of a glock just as fast as out of an AR. Nope. No way. It's impossible
Posted on 11/7/17 at 2:02 am to olgoi khorkhoi
quote:
If you put a .50 upper on it, it is bolt action, instead of the gas system that characterizes an AR-15. I can use a hammer, nail and vice to fire 00 buckshot, but that doesn't make my workshop a 12-gauge.
I was trying to be funny with the BMG but at the same time point out the AR can be built in a bunch of calibers, the .458 SOCOM isn't exactly a weak round.
This post was edited on 11/7/17 at 2:05 am
Posted on 11/7/17 at 2:03 am to Obtuse1
You can get a 100 round magazine for an AR-15.
An AK-47 or AK 12 gauge would be far better in close range than either the AR-15 or a 9mm pistol.
An AK-47 or AK 12 gauge would be far better in close range than either the AR-15 or a 9mm pistol.
Posted on 11/7/17 at 2:04 am to AbuTheMonkey
quote:
You deftly avoided answering the actual question and issue at hand.
Well the question becomes how far are we willing to go. To this point we have showed that it's not far enough. They saw people's heads off and we court martial ours for pissing on dead bodies. Do you really wonder why we will never eradicate them with this mentality?
This post was edited on 11/7/17 at 2:05 am
Posted on 11/7/17 at 2:10 am to olgoi khorkhoi
quote:
You can get a 100 round magazine for an AR-15.
An AK-47 or AK 12 gauge would be far better in close range than either the AR-15 or a 9mm pistol.
Yes, you can get 100 round mags or drums for the AR but that is outside the context here.
I mean if we are choosing any weapon then a LWRC SMG45 would be hard to beat. I don't think that is the context here.
Posted on 11/7/17 at 2:10 am to Obtuse1
an AR-15 refers only to .223/5.56. It is one of the weakest rifle rounds there is. Changing the caliber isn't a valid argument, it's just changing the subject. There are several calibers available in the AR platform. Most are more powerful than the AR-15 because, as I said, it's fairly weak.
Posted on 11/7/17 at 2:17 am to olgoi khorkhoi
quote:
an AR-15 refers only to .223/5.56
BS
Posted on 11/7/17 at 2:30 am to ShreveportHog94
quote:
That's rich coming from someone who thinks there's no limit on 1st ammendement
You obviously have failed to comprehend the point of my argument.
My point is there should be no limits to the bill of rights. These rights are inalienable.
Posted on 11/7/17 at 2:35 am to Obtuse1
You can make that argument. I've never heard a knowledgeable person call an AR-10, AR-22, AR-9 or .300 blackout an AR-15. Sometimes gun manufacturers advertise other calibers as ar-15s in order to reach a wider market and show up in more web searches.
If referring to another caliber (besides those previously mentioned), it's most correct, imo, to say "an AR chambered in _____", as "AR-15" is reserved for .223/5.56.
If referring to another caliber (besides those previously mentioned), it's most correct, imo, to say "an AR chambered in _____", as "AR-15" is reserved for .223/5.56.
This post was edited on 11/7/17 at 2:39 am
Posted on 11/7/17 at 2:45 am to beerJeep
The only way to truly stop gun violence is to ensure there is always a gun around to stop that violence.
Posted on 11/7/17 at 2:48 am to ShreveportHog94
My argument : bring your bad arse and take it.
Posted on 11/7/17 at 3:18 am to Rougarou13
What are the limits of the second amendment?
Really?
Go buy a nuclear weapon at the gun store.
There is precedent for making various weapons off limits.
Really?
Go buy a nuclear weapon at the gun store.
There is precedent for making various weapons off limits.
Posted on 11/7/17 at 3:31 am to FT
quote:
What are the limits of the second amendment?
Shall not be infringed. Did you read it, retard?
quote:
Really?
Yep. Really, really, really, really...
quote:
Go buy a nuclear weapon at the gun store.
Love this argument. Shows how your mom fricked her brother.
quote:
There is precedent for making various weapons off limits.
Nope! Just proves you have no reading comprehension skills is all:
LINK
Posted on 11/7/17 at 3:53 am to FT
quote:
The second amendment has limits.
It doesn't though. Activist judges have allowed the intent to be overstepped.
Posted on 11/7/17 at 3:58 am to JamalSanders
Lol. Explain how it’s being overstepped...
Posted on 11/7/17 at 4:34 am to Errerrerrwere
"...The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
Let's start with a couple definitions. All taken from Google.
Arms - weapons and ammunition; armaments.
Weapons - a thing designed for or used to inflict bodily harm or physical damage.
Infringed - act so as to limit or undermine.
Now that we know what we are talking about. Let's list something's that we can all agree on are weapons.
Knives
Bats
Batons
Swords
Guns
Are there types of guns that are illegal to own currently? If so the illegality of those guns, which are weapons, which are arms, is being limited.
So yes the restrictions on the second amendment are overstepping the amendment to the Constitution.
Let's start with a couple definitions. All taken from Google.
Arms - weapons and ammunition; armaments.
Weapons - a thing designed for or used to inflict bodily harm or physical damage.
Infringed - act so as to limit or undermine.
Now that we know what we are talking about. Let's list something's that we can all agree on are weapons.
Knives
Bats
Batons
Swords
Guns
Are there types of guns that are illegal to own currently? If so the illegality of those guns, which are weapons, which are arms, is being limited.
So yes the restrictions on the second amendment are overstepping the amendment to the Constitution.
Posted on 11/7/17 at 4:39 am to JamalSanders
quote:
Let's start with a couple definitions. All taken from Google.
Let’s not...
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News