Really, really dumb

On 1/15/2020 11:53 PM, John B. wrote:

I've frequently mentioned that Singapore, as an example, has laws to
protect society while the U.S.has laws to protect the individual.

John, you first mock the idea of laws; then you turn around and praise
the strict laws and enforcement of Singapore.

It's looking like you don't really have a rational point. You're just
arguing to argue.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On 1/16/2020 10:31 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/15/2020 9:41 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:


Yes it does. It disarms the law abiding citizens so that
the criminals won't have any opposition when committing
crimes. LOL

The way things are here the criminals have more rights
under the law than what their victims do.

Whatever you say, it's undeniable that Canada has much
stricter gun laws than the U.S. and also has far less gun
violence than the U.S.

It seems controlling gun ownership works much better than
arming the population in case they have to defend against
criminals.



Seems to be working very well for Maduro. For his disarmed
citizenry, not so much.

Whatever argument one might make about hunting or self
defense or recreational target plinking, none are essential
to our beloved 2d.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 3:45:02 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/15/2020 5:51 PM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 12:10:27 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 1/15/2020 4:58 AM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

Here in Canada we have all sorts of gun control laws but they don't seem to keep the guns out of the hands of criminals or soon to be criminals; they just keep or remove them from the hands of law abiding citizens.

Really? Your gun laws don't work?

Look at some comparative data:
https://www.nationmaster.com/country.../Violent-crime

No laws are perfect. But that doesn't mean laws are useless. It looks to
me like Canada's gun laws are doing a pretty good job - or at least, way
better than those of the U.S.

Yup, make a law and everyrthing will come up roses...

But Frank, if that is true why is it that Vermont, with it's nearly
non existant gun laws has a murder by firearms rate of 1.3/100,000
while Washing D.C. with rather restrictive gun laws has a firearm
murder rate of 18/100,000?

Gun violence is not a one-variable problem, John. Yes, that makes it
complicated. But that doesn't mean the problem shouldn't be addressed.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Frank, have you ever bothered to actually look up the statistics on "gun violence"? Most of it is from two sources - gang wars and suicides. Pointing out the EXTREMELY rare mass shooting by what turns out to inevitably be an insane person isn't getting you any points.

On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 4:02:31 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
tion, made in

Do you suppose there might be some difference in lethality between the
Henry's 22 caliber bullet and that of the AR-15?

If not, I'm surprised that the military doesn't use Henry 22 rifles
exclusively. They're pretty inexpensive. Think of the tax money to be saved!


Why do you continuously make straw man arguments. A .22 long rifle is at LEAST as deadly as the .223 AR-15. The only difference is the range. A .22 LR pistol is the weapon of choice of assassins since it is relatively easy to mute.

Why don't you invent an entirely unreal reality to make your arguments in?

On Thursday, January 16, 2020 at 7:26:03 AM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 8:48:36 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
snip

Actually I was talking about large magazines, which have been used on
.22 rifles for years. And I included a note (and labeling it so) that
large magazines had been used on one of the first repeating rifles
made in America, in 1860.

But not 100 rounds -- or more. Looking at it from a Second Amendment standpoint: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EM3vlPPNFVM AR-15 variants are fun guns, but at some point, fun has to be balanced against public welfare -- kind of like we do with drinking and driving and basically everything else in the world. We even crack-down on religion at some point: https://www..cbsnews.com/news/oregon...healing-trial/

-- Jay Beattie.

Funny how it didn't matter when that gunman shot up that Republican baseball game in DC with an AR-15. At that point the Democrats suddenly saw "assault weapons with large capacity magazines" to be a good idea. Steve Scalise survived to live another day and he isn't writing anti-gun legislation because of a crazy man.

On Thursday, January 16, 2020 at 8:31:25 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/15/2020 9:41 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:


Yes it does. It disarms the law abiding citizens so that the criminals won't have any opposition when committing crimes. LOL

The way things are here the criminals have more rights under the law than what their victims do.

Whatever you say, it's undeniable that Canada has much stricter gun laws
than the U.S. and also has far less gun violence than the U.S.

It seems controlling gun ownership works much better than arming the
population in case they have to defend against criminals.


--
- Frank Krygowski

And yet another straw-man argument. Canada ALSO doesn't have 40 million illegal aliens all trying to be the meanest man on their block.

On Thursday, January 16, 2020 at 9:43:28 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
On 1/16/2020 10:31 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/15/2020 9:41 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:


Yes it does. It disarms the law abiding citizens so that
the criminals won't have any opposition when committing
crimes. LOL

The way things are here the criminals have more rights
under the law than what their victims do.

Whatever you say, it's undeniable that Canada has much
stricter gun laws than the U.S. and also has far less gun
violence than the U.S.

It seems controlling gun ownership works much better than
arming the population in case they have to defend against
criminals.



Seems to be working very well for Maduro. For his disarmed
citizenry, not so much.

Whatever argument one might make about hunting or self
defense or recreational target plinking, none are essential
to our beloved 2d.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

You have to remember that Frank is a great fan of Castro. He believes that any system of government that has to ne forced upon people is a very good step in the right direction.

On 1/16/2020 2:12 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 4:02:31 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
tion, made in

Do you suppose there might be some difference in lethality between the
Henry's 22 caliber bullet and that of the AR-15?

If not, I'm surprised that the military doesn't use Henry 22 rifles
exclusively. They're pretty inexpensive. Think of the tax money to be saved!


Why do you continuously make straw man arguments. A .22 long rifle is at LEAST as deadly as the .223 AR-15.

Absolute total bull****. Read
https://www.thetrace.org/2017/06/phy...ssault-rifles/
starting at the heading "Velocity."

Sheesh.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On 1/16/2020 3:17 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/16/2020 2:12 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 4:02:31 PM UTC-8, Frank
Krygowski wrote:
tion, made in

Do you suppose there might be some difference in
lethality between the
Henry's 22 caliber bullet and that of the AR-15?

If not, I'm surprised that the military doesn't use Henry
22 rifles
exclusively. They're pretty inexpensive. Think of the tax
money to be saved!


Why do you continuously make straw man arguments. A .22
long rifle is at LEAST as deadly as the .223 AR-15.

Absolute total bull****. Read
https://www.thetrace.org/2017/06/phy...ssault-rifles/
starting at the heading "Velocity."

Sheesh.



..22LR vs .223 has had more study than you might think:

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/22...ginners-guide/

That's opinion. How about data? If you wade through the
famous FBI paper, they cover a lot of variables. excerpts:

"With the exceptions of hits to the brain or upper spinal
cord, the concept of reliable and reproducible immediate
incapacitation of the human target by gunshot wounds to the
torso is a myth.27 The human target is a complex and durable
one."

"A bullet simply cannot knock a man down. If it had the
energy to do so, then equal energy would be applied against
the shooter and he too would be knocked down."

gundata.org/images/fbi-handgun-ballistics.pdf



An experienced MD says:
"I have seen a .22 caliber bullet completely incapacitate
someone and a .45 ACP fail to achieve that result. People
and animals shot with 10mm rounds and .357 SIG rounds have
continued to run from the police. I have been on scene as a
tactical medical provider when a suicidal person shot
himself in the head with a .45 Colt round resulting in
instant death. And I have seen the same results in suicides
that used smaller calibers, including .22, .25, and .32. I
have also seen people hit with 9mm, .40, and .45 without so
much as staggering or slowing their verbal or physical
activities."
https://www.policemag.com/340890/sto...-and-realities

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 16:17:41 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 1/16/2020 2:12 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 4:02:31 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
tion, made in

Do you suppose there might be some difference in lethality between the
Henry's 22 caliber bullet and that of the AR-15?

If not, I'm surprised that the military doesn't use Henry 22 rifles
exclusively. They're pretty inexpensive. Think of the tax money to be saved!


Why do you continuously make straw man arguments. A .22 long rifle is at LEAST as deadly as the .223 AR-15.

Absolute total bull****. Read
https://www.thetrace.org/2017/06/phy...ssault-rifles/
starting at the heading "Velocity."

Sheesh.

But yet the Israeli "Wrath of God" assassins who killed the Black
September terrorists used a .22 pistol as a matter of choice...
--
cheers,

John B.