A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Really, really dumb



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #241  
Old January 17th 20, 04:43 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jOHN b.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,699
Default Really, really dumb

On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 18:48:26 -0800 (PST), jbeattie
wrote:

On Thursday, January 16, 2020 at 5:10:31 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 07:26:00 -0800 (PST), 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.


I don't think anyone was thinking of a 100 round magazine.

While I didn't read all the various laws about magazine capacity the
few I did read used the number "10" as a sort of the dividing line.
However this was defined as a shoulder weapon as many commonly used
pistols today have a magazine holding more than 10 rounds. The Glock
19 for example, a very common choice of police departments, has a
standard 15 round magazine.

It might be interesting to know that a shotgun used for migratory bird
hunting, by federal law, is limited to 3 rounds, usually by use of a
plug in the magazine to restrict capacity to that number. I can't give
the specific date of this law but I have read that it dates to the
1930's.

Interestingly I have never heard anyone complain about that limit to
magazine capacity :-)


FYI, there are lots of weapons restrictions in connection with taking game in Oregon. See e.g. https://www.dfw.state.or.us/resource...ns/weapons.asp Oregon also has certain hunts that are only open for muzzle loaders, so going old-school pays dividends.

Max five round capacity for semi-auto center fire except hunting squirrels. The AR-15 is a squirrel rifle. Aim for the head. https://myodfw.com/big-game-hunting/...-gray-squirrel

-- Jay Beattie.


Historically one "barked" squirrels. Fired so the bullet grazes the
tree bark under the squirrel's head and kills by concussion and ruins
no edible meat which world be lost if you hit the squirrel dead center
with your .69 cal musket (which you maintain as part of your Militia
requirements :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

Ads
  #242  
Old January 17th 20, 05:04 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,395
Default Really, really dumb

On Thursday, January 16, 2020 at 5:44:20 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
On 1/16/2020 3:17 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/16/2020 2:12 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
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."


Which certainly does not claim a .22 is as lethal as an AR-15 .223 round!

"A bullet simply cannot knock a man down.


Nobody here has claimed it could. The difference in lethality between a 22LR and
an AR-15's .223 is related to its velocity (or energy) and its shape, and how
they affect the internal organs and/or bones.

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


We're not talking about odd incidents, or mythical knocking people down. We're We're talking about physical damage to humans causing fatalities. I can give
several links to details, if really needed - and I can't believe it's needed.

But this is silly; let's cut to the chase: If a standard 22LR were as lethal as
a backyard 22 rifle, why would the military pay for the much more expensive
ammunition that was heavier, bulkier, and harder to carry? Why would they not
just use 22s?

Again: Sheesh!

- Frank Krygowski
  #243  
Old January 17th 20, 05:07 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,395
Default Really, really dumb

On Thursday, January 16, 2020 at 6:31:29 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 11:32:50 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote:

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.


Nice try. You delete the majority of the message and seize on a single
paragraph.

But no, I don't mock the idea of laws, but I do mock your seeming
assertion that simply making a new law somehow, in some magically way,
will make everything wonderful.


Which, of course, I never said. Not even close. Your "straw man" technique is
so obvious, it should embarrass you.

- Frank Krygowski
  #244  
Old January 17th 20, 05:09 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,395
Default Really, really dumb

On Thursday, January 16, 2020 at 6:39:35 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 11:26:18 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 1/15/2020 11:48 PM, John B. wrote:


You then assumed, for whatever reason, that a Henry .22 ( a rifle
that has never existed) was the subject under discussion...


A Henry .22 has never existed?? Good grief!

https://www.henryusa.com/rifles/lever-action-22-rifle/



Nice try. Did you read the part that said:

"Henry Repeating Arms was started by Louis Imperato and his son
Anthony Imperato in Brooklyn, New York in 1996. The first model
produced was the Henry H001 Classic Lever Action .22 ...


Which further proves your statement was wrong. "A Henry .22 ( a rifle
that has never existed) ..." remains absolute nonsense. Your deflection

doesn't change that fact.

- Frank Krygowski
  #245  
Old January 17th 20, 05:38 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jOHN b.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,699
Default Really, really dumb

On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 20:07:06 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On Thursday, January 16, 2020 at 6:31:29 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 11:32:50 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote:

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.


Nice try. You delete the majority of the message and seize on a single
paragraph.

But no, I don't mock the idea of laws, but I do mock your seeming
assertion that simply making a new law somehow, in some magically way,
will make everything wonderful.


Which, of course, I never said. Not even close. Your "straw man" technique is
so obvious, it should embarrass you.

- Frank Krygowski


Admittedly I embellish your statements with a bit of poetry but the
meaning is as you write. For example, Canada has gun laws and
everything is, apparently in your mind, better.

And than when I mention the rather loose gun laws in Vermont and the
low firearm crime rate as opposed to the rather rigid gun laws in
Washington D.C. and their high firearm crime rate you go slip sliding
away rather than facing facts.

You seem quite adapt at ignoring facts and espousing your own
fantasies regardless of their validity.

So lets hear it for Frank. Laws will prevent crime; all bicycles must
have 18mm tires; and helmets do no good at all.

--
cheers,

John B.

  #246  
Old January 17th 20, 03:01 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AMuzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,234
Default Really, really dumb

On 1/16/2020 10:04 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Thursday, January 16, 2020 at 5:44:20 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
On 1/16/2020 3:17 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/16/2020 2:12 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
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."


Which certainly does not claim a .22 is as lethal as an AR-15 .223 round!

"A bullet simply cannot knock a man down.


Nobody here has claimed it could. The difference in lethality between a 22LR and
an AR-15's .223 is related to its velocity (or energy) and its shape, and how
they affect the internal organs and/or bones.

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


We're not talking about odd incidents, or mythical knocking people down. We're We're talking about physical damage to humans causing fatalities. I can give
several links to details, if really needed - and I can't believe it's needed.

But this is silly; let's cut to the chase: If a standard 22LR were as lethal as
a backyard 22 rifle, why would the military pay for the much more expensive
ammunition that was heavier, bulkier, and harder to carry? Why would they not
just use 22s?

Again: Sheesh!

- Frank Krygowski


Maybe they know something about their craft.

Back at you- why would the US military change from .308/
7.62 down to the .556/ .223 round for their primary issue
rifles?

As with tires or anything else there may well be an optimal
solution at some point in time to a dynamic series of
problems. That doesn't mean parameters don't change, at
which time something else may be optimal.

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


  #247  
Old January 17th 20, 04:13 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Tom Kunich[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 227
Default Really, really dumb

On Thursday, January 16, 2020 at 1:17:45 PM UTC-8, 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.


--
- Frank Krygowski


You didn't read that article did you?
  #248  
Old January 17th 20, 04:34 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Tom Kunich[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 227
Default Really, really dumb

On Thursday, January 16, 2020 at 8:04:39 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Thursday, January 16, 2020 at 5:44:20 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
On 1/16/2020 3:17 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/16/2020 2:12 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
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."


Which certainly does not claim a .22 is as lethal as an AR-15 .223 round!

"A bullet simply cannot knock a man down.


Nobody here has claimed it could. The difference in lethality between a 22LR and
an AR-15's .223 is related to its velocity (or energy) and its shape, and how
they affect the internal organs and/or bones.

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


We're not talking about odd incidents, or mythical knocking people down. We're We're talking about physical damage to humans causing fatalities. I can give
several links to details, if really needed - and I can't believe it's needed.

But this is silly; let's cut to the chase: If a standard 22LR were as lethal as
a backyard 22 rifle, why would the military pay for the much more expensive
ammunition that was heavier, bulkier, and harder to carry? Why would they not
just use 22s?

Again: Sheesh!

- Frank Krygowski


Obviously just talking about a gun made you **** your pants. But they you aren't going to take away other people's rights because you don't like them.
  #249  
Old January 17th 20, 04:44 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,290
Default Really, really dumb

On 1/17/2020 9:01 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 1/16/2020 10:04 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Thursday, January 16, 2020 at 5:44:20 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
On 1/16/2020 3:17 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/16/2020 2:12 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
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."


Which certainly does not claim a .22 is as lethal as an AR-15 .223 round!

"A bullet simply cannot knock a man down.


Nobody here has claimed it could. The difference in lethality between
a 22LR and
an AR-15's .223 is related to its velocity (or energy) and its shape,
and how
they affect the internal organs and/or bones.

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


We're not talking about odd incidents, or mythical knocking people
down. We're We're talking about physical damage to humans causing
fatalities. I can give
several links to details, if really needed - and I can't believe it's
needed.

But this is silly; let's cut to the chase: If a standard 22LR were as
lethal as
a backyard 22 rifle, why would the military pay for the much more
expensive
ammunition that was heavier, bulkier, and harder to carry? Why would
they not
just use 22s?

Again: Sheesh!

- Frank Krygowski


Maybe they know something about their craft.

Back at you- why would the US military change from .308/ 7.62 down to
the .556/ .223 round for their primary issue rifles?


Because they found that the benefits of carrying more lighter rounds
greatly outweighed the advantages of heavier rounds. And because the 223
cartridge was much more deadly once it entered an enemy's body. There
were reports (from special forces who first used these guns) of 223s
leaving gaping holes in enemy bodies where bullets of previous designs
would pass through and cause much less damage. Also, the AR-style gun
itself was easier to shoot.

Here, read this:
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...-story/545153/

As with tires or anything else there may well be an optimal solution at
some point in time to a dynamic series of problems. That doesn't mean
parameters don't change, at which time something else may be optimal.


Granted. But what I tried to say (but mis-spoke yesterday) is still
true. The AR's 223 round is much more deadly than that of a backyard 22
rifle. If it were not, soldiers would be shooting 22LRs in battle.

--
- Frank Krygowski
  #250  
Old January 17th 20, 06:35 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AMuzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,234
Default Really, really dumb

On 1/17/2020 9:44 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/17/2020 9:01 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 1/16/2020 10:04 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Thursday, January 16, 2020 at 5:44:20 PM UTC-5, AMuzi
wrote:
On 1/16/2020 3:17 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/16/2020 2:12 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
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."

Which certainly does not claim a .22 is as lethal as an
AR-15 .223 round!

"A bullet simply cannot knock a man down.

Nobody here has claimed it could. The difference in
lethality between a 22LR and
an AR-15's .223 is related to its velocity (or energy)
and its shape, and how
they affect the internal organs and/or bones.

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


We're not talking about odd incidents, or mythical
knocking people down. We're We're talking about physical
damage to humans causing fatalities. I can give
several links to details, if really needed - and I can't
believe it's needed.

But this is silly; let's cut to the chase: If a standard
22LR were as lethal as
a backyard 22 rifle, why would the military pay for the
much more expensive
ammunition that was heavier, bulkier, and harder to
carry? Why would they not
just use 22s?

Again: Sheesh!

- Frank Krygowski


Maybe they know something about their craft.

Back at you- why would the US military change from .308/
7.62 down to the .556/ .223 round for their primary issue
rifles?


Because they found that the benefits of carrying more
lighter rounds greatly outweighed the advantages of heavier
rounds. And because the 223 cartridge was much more deadly
once it entered an enemy's body. There were reports (from
special forces who first used these guns) of 223s leaving
gaping holes in enemy bodies where bullets of previous
designs would pass through and cause much less damage. Also,
the AR-style gun itself was easier to shoot.

Here, read this:
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...-story/545153/


As with tires or anything else there may well be an
optimal solution at some point in time to a dynamic series
of problems. That doesn't mean parameters don't change, at
which time something else may be optimal.


Granted. But what I tried to say (but mis-spoke yesterday)
is still true. The AR's 223 round is much more deadly than
that of a backyard 22 rifle. If it were not, soldiers would
be shooting 22LRs in battle.


Not as deadly generally as 7.62. Or a Barrett .50 for that
matter. Special Forces still make excellent use of .22 for
some types of action (as a recent post noted). No matter
how you try to spin this, an AR-15 semi is not magic, and a
..223 is not magic either. They are both mediocre in a range
of weapons by any measure.

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


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
This is just dumb... Uncle Dave Racing 19 September 28th 09 08:58 AM
HOW dumb?? Brimstone[_6_] UK 89 April 6th 09 03:49 PM
this is so dumb brockfisher05 Unicycling 10 December 18th 04 03:38 AM
Dumb question the black rose General 12 October 19th 04 09:37 PM
How dumb am I? Andy P UK 2 September 18th 03 08:37 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2020 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.