New Tactical Cycling Maneuver

On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 2:51:00 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Here's a more complete breakdown:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/...y-weapon-used/

If "Firearms type not stated" exceed known rifle murders by a factor of
ten, I think it's premature to give rifles a free pass.

Most people that have at least half of a brain know that "cause of death unknown" means that a person was not murdered with any sort of gun or knife but probably died of natural causes in an area where they do not have medical examiners and the body is beginning to stink. But not Frank, he is certain that the police are not competent enough to discover a bullet hole in a person. This is precisely why I know that Frank is past his due date.

On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 4:06:41 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:

Particularly after reading about the death of Pat Tillman. https://www.npr.org/templates/story/...ryId=112816210 That's a good read.

Guns like all mechanical devices have collectors and admirers -- non-insane people who like the transformer aspect of AR15 variants and go plinking or squirrel hunting. They're kind of cool. And then you have the insane wannabes, mass-shooters, etc. It seems that limiting the size of magazines would give the former what they want while requiring the latter to at least stop and reload, although they'll always find larger mags somewhere. Bump stocks don't have much merit and were appropriately banned. I don't get having an AR15 for home defense. Get a shotgun or a handgun if you think you need one -- or move. In the anarchist jurisdiction of Portland, I've never felt the need for a gun, and I own guns. I do have a little league baseball bat in the closet -- in case of attack by little leaguers.
Tell me Jay, how many mass murders have we had under Trump and where were they?

On 9/28/2020 12:41 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 20:35:26 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 10:25:20 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 17:50:36 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:
But as you know, I don't condemn all rifles. I'm very much in favor of
hunting. And I'll note yet again that hunters, target shooters, etc.
have no real need of a gun that fires more than five to ten rounds in a
minute.
But Frank, a legal AR-whatever fires one shot for each time the
trigger is pulled and Ed McGivern set a record on September 13, 1932,
shooting five rounds from a double-action revolver at 15 feet in 2/5
of a second. Note this was a .38 S&W Special, which was made in 1917.

John, you have so much trouble understanding my point, I suspect it might be deliberate.

I know there are countless guns that fire faster than my proposed limit. I know it's considered normal. But I'm saying it
shouldn't be for civilian use. The detriments to society far outweigh the benefits - because, really, what are the
benefits to getting ten rounds shot in a minute?

Frank, it is obvious that you just don't know what you are talking
about with your "rounds per minute" theory.
Which I have been trying to tell you.

A Smith & Wesson revolver, first built in the late 1800's will fire
faster, I even referenced a record set in the 1930's with a pistol
made in 1917 that fired at a rate of 750 rounds per minute.

We've been through this before. I'm not talking about firing rates in
terms of how quickly you can pull a trigger six or eight times.

I'm talking about how many rounds can you fire within one minute. Start
a stopwatch, shoot away, and if you can fire more than ten times (or
hell, more than five times), there is no practical use for that
capability except to kill other human beings.

You persist in not understanding my point. You're a reasonably
intelligent guy, so your misunderstanding must be deliberate.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 9/28/2020 8:44 AM, AMuzi wrote:

Mr Stoner designed the AR-15 specifically as a civilian sporting arm,
always and only, and so they remain down to today.
"Civilian sporting arm." Please define that. What are its defining
features, and why are they different from (say) a classic hunting rifle?


--
- Frank Krygowski

On 9/28/2020 9:21 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 4:06:41 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:

Particularly after reading about the death of Pat Tillman. https://www.npr.org/templates/story/...ryId=112816210 That's a good read.

Guns like all mechanical devices have collectors and admirers -- non-insane people who like the transformer aspect of AR15 variants and go plinking or squirrel hunting. They're kind of cool. And then you have the insane wannabes, mass-shooters, etc. It seems that limiting the size of magazines would give the former what they want while requiring the latter to at least stop and reload, although they'll always find larger mags somewhere. Bump stocks don't have much merit and were appropriately banned. I don't get having an AR15 for home defense. Get a shotgun or a handgun if you think you need one -- or move. In the anarchist jurisdiction of Portland, I've never felt the need for a gun, and I own guns. I do have a little league baseball bat in the closet -- in case of attack by little leaguers.
Tell me Jay, how many mass murders have we had under Trump and where were they?



Tom, that is asinine. As if anything down in the Potomac
swamp affects psychos.

Maybe I missed something.

Please reply with the method Dwight Eisenhower used to
incite Ed Gein (famous Wisconsin gourmand) and then continue
with Richard Nixon's culpability in the Manson killings. Do
you really think Daviod Berkowitz was listening to voices of
both Gerald Ford and James Earl Carter instead of his dog?

I'll wait.

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

On 9/28/2020 9:52 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/28/2020 8:44 AM, AMuzi wrote:

Mr Stoner designed the AR-15 specifically as a civilian
sporting arm, always and only, and so they remain down to
today.
"Civilian sporting arm." Please define that. What are its
defining features, and why are they different from (say) a
classic hunting rifle?



A 'classic' hunting rifle would be 'not the latest thing'

A good example of 'classic' would be Eugene Stoner's AR-15
from the 1950s for example.


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

On Monday, September 28, 2020 at 7:21:29 AM UTC-7, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 4:06:41 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:

Particularly after reading about the death of Pat Tillman. https://www.npr.org/templates/story/...ryId=112816210 That's a good read.

Guns like all mechanical devices have collectors and admirers -- non-insane people who like the transformer aspect of AR15 variants and go plinking or squirrel hunting. They're kind of cool. And then you have the insane wannabes, mass-shooters, etc. It seems that limiting the size of magazines would give the former what they want while requiring the latter to at least stop and reload, although they'll always find larger mags somewhere. Bump stocks don't have much merit and were appropriately banned. I don't get having an AR15 for home defense. Get a shotgun or a handgun if you think you need one -- or move. In the anarchist jurisdiction of Portland, I've never felt the need for a gun, and I own guns. I do have a little league baseball bat in the closet -- in case of attack by little leaguers.
Tell me Jay, how many mass murders have we had under Trump and where were they?

Google it, Tom. I'm not your research assistant. The most famous is probably: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Las_Vegas_shooting

"At a press conference, U.S. President Donald Trump described Paddock as "a very very sick individual", and "a demented man, [with] a lot of problems".. He added, "the police department has done such an incredible job, and we'll be talking about gun laws as time goes by". A White House official talking points memo, distributed to Trump allies, opposed tightening gun control since "new laws won't stop a mad man", but "will curtail the freedoms of law abiding citizens". On October 2, Trump issued a proclamation to honor the victims and their families. On October 4, Trump visited the shooting victims and first responders."

Thoughts and prayers.

-- Jay Beattie.

On Monday, September 28, 2020 at 7:49:42 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/28/2020 12:41 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 20:35:26 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 10:25:20 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 17:50:36 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:
But as you know, I don't condemn all rifles. I'm very much in favor of
hunting. And I'll note yet again that hunters, target shooters, etc.
have no real need of a gun that fires more than five to ten rounds in a
minute.
But Frank, a legal AR-whatever fires one shot for each time the
trigger is pulled and Ed McGivern set a record on September 13, 1932,
shooting five rounds from a double-action revolver at 15 feet in 2/5
of a second. Note this was a .38 S&W Special, which was made in 1917.

John, you have so much trouble understanding my point, I suspect it might be deliberate.

I know there are countless guns that fire faster than my proposed limit. I know it's considered normal. But I'm saying it
shouldn't be for civilian use. The detriments to society far outweigh the benefits - because, really, what are the
benefits to getting ten rounds shot in a minute?

Frank, it is obvious that you just don't know what you are talking
about with your "rounds per minute" theory.
Which I have been trying to tell you.

A Smith & Wesson revolver, first built in the late 1800's will fire
faster, I even referenced a record set in the 1930's with a pistol
made in 1917 that fired at a rate of 750 rounds per minute.
We've been through this before. I'm not talking about firing rates in
terms of how quickly you can pull a trigger six or eight times.

I'm talking about how many rounds can you fire within one minute. Start
a stopwatch, shoot away, and if you can fire more than ten times (or
hell, more than five times), there is no practical use for that
capability except to kill other human beings.

You persist in not understanding my point. You're a reasonably
intelligent guy, so your misunderstanding must be deliberate.

On a good day your are sounding more and more like Joe Biden. On a bad day you're worse.
There is NO other weapon than a single shot rifle with which I cannot fire six or eight times in a minute AND HIT THE TARGET EVERY TIME. And if I set up the ammo properly I could probably do that with a single shot rifle as well. I can shoot three times that speed with a six shot revolver with reloaders. You are stupid and you don't even have a clue just how stupid you are.. You don't know a thing about war or self defense because you've always been safely ensconced in the arms of American freedom. It would probably be worth showing up and beating the holy **** out of you just to show you what could happen to a person incapable of self defense. If I could break the arm of a black belt the same size as me in one move, he could learn that a gun is a handy thing to have in emergencies.

On Monday, September 28, 2020 at 9:25:39 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, September 28, 2020 at 7:21:29 AM UTC-7, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 4:06:41 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:

Particularly after reading about the death of Pat Tillman. https://www.npr.org/templates/story/...ryId=112816210 That's a good read.

Guns like all mechanical devices have collectors and admirers -- non-insane people who like the transformer aspect of AR15 variants and go plinking or squirrel hunting. They're kind of cool. And then you have the insane wannabes, mass-shooters, etc. It seems that limiting the size of magazines would give the former what they want while requiring the latter to at least stop and reload, although they'll always find larger mags somewhere. Bump stocks don't have much merit and were appropriately banned. I don't get having an AR15 for home defense. Get a shotgun or a handgun if you think you need one -- or move. In the anarchist jurisdiction of Portland, I've never felt the need for a gun, and I own guns. I do have a little league baseball bat in the closet -- in case of attack by little leaguers.
Tell me Jay, how many mass murders have we had under Trump and where were they?
Google it, Tom. I'm not your research assistant. The most famous is probably: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Las_Vegas_shooting

"At a press conference, U.S. President Donald Trump described Paddock as "a very very sick individual", and "a demented man, [with] a lot of problems". He added, "the police department has done such an incredible job, and we'll be talking about gun laws as time goes by". A White House official talking points memo, distributed to Trump allies, opposed tightening gun control since "new laws won't stop a mad man", but "will curtail the freedoms of law abiding citizens". On October 2, Trump issued a proclamation to honor the victims and their families. On October 4, Trump visited the shooting victims and first responders."

Thoughts and prayers.

Funny that they count the mass shootings in Chicago and Detroit in their count of mass shootings. I was sort of hoping you would make that point. Why didn't you?

On Monday, September 28, 2020 at 9:25:39 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, September 28, 2020 at 7:21:29 AM UTC-7, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 4:06:41 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:

Particularly after reading about the death of Pat Tillman. https://www.npr.org/templates/story/...ryId=112816210 That's a good read.

Guns like all mechanical devices have collectors and admirers -- non-insane people who like the transformer aspect of AR15 variants and go plinking or squirrel hunting. They're kind of cool. And then you have the insane wannabes, mass-shooters, etc. It seems that limiting the size of magazines would give the former what they want while requiring the latter to at least stop and reload, although they'll always find larger mags somewhere. Bump stocks don't have much merit and were appropriately banned. I don't get having an AR15 for home defense. Get a shotgun or a handgun if you think you need one -- or move. In the anarchist jurisdiction of Portland, I've never felt the need for a gun, and I own guns. I do have a little league baseball bat in the closet -- in case of attack by little leaguers.
Tell me Jay, how many mass murders have we had under Trump and where were they?
Google it, Tom. I'm not your research assistant. The most famous is probably: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Las_Vegas_shooting

"At a press conference, U.S. President Donald Trump described Paddock as "a very very sick individual", and "a demented man, [with] a lot of problems". He added, "the police department has done such an incredible job, and we'll be talking about gun laws as time goes by". A White House official talking points memo, distributed to Trump allies, opposed tightening gun control since "new laws won't stop a mad man", but "will curtail the freedoms of law abiding citizens". On October 2, Trump issued a proclamation to honor the victims and their families. On October 4, Trump visited the shooting victims and first responders."

Thoughts and prayers.

Are you afraid of guns like Frank who is actually crapping his pants simply by reading the word? I sort of have the idea that you recognize the reason that the founders inserted the 2nd Amendment in a place that was second only to the basic rights of all men - then gave them the rights to protect those freedom.