IGX

nafod wrote:As for the 995, if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

It's a semiautomatic only, pistol-caliber carbine with a 10-round magazine. Anyone who thinks it looks, quacks, smells or shits like an assault rifle is ignorant at best.

Who gives a fuck if people off themselves with guns, pills or find a train to stand in front of? Even if 100% of suicides were with a gun, it's still does not justify controlling them for the rest of us.

Comparing us to Australia or Europe is nuts. Different cultures, and different people.

Australia and Europe does not have the same majical 13% of the population who commit 51% of our murders. The one;s they have ar mostly immagrant or the decendents of immagrants, thus are of a generally higher IQ then the loser's of tribal wars or slave raids that came here and were subjected to 300+ years of dog like breeding.

The average black american IQ is 80.

Now I am not advocating a racist genocide. If the 2nd Amendment was respected fully,the shitbags would find themselves gunned down more often and with greater efficientcy than they do to each other.

Read the 2nd Amendment. End of argument.


BTW NAFOD you were in the fucking military, they are called magazines not clips.

Mebe the owners of the M1 might beg to differ.Believe he is loading a clip in tje pic.

Bobby wrote:Mebe the owners of the M1 might beg to differ.Believe he is loading a clip in tje pic.

No the M-1 does use a clip but most weapons use magazines.

Not in a clip the bullet is not ensconsed but secured by by their rims.

In a magazine , the bullet(s) are ensconsed.

AR-15, AK-47s, Tech-9's Glocks ect ect. M<any of the weapons talked about use magazines.

It's one thin when a reproter says clip, seeing as most are liberal cunts, who know nothing about weapons other than they scare them. It's another when someone who should know better does.

It's a pet peeve I'll admit, but it feeds intpo the general lack of knowledge thrown into this debate and even more frustrating when someone advocates dissarming you when they know fuck all about the subject.

CNN host Piers Morgan has been dragged into the U.K.'s hacking scandal once again. This time, the host of the BBC's Newsnight told a media ethics inquiry that Morgan had showed him how to hack into a cell phone's voice mail. SkyTV reports that Jeremy Paxman remembered a lunch from September 2002 for two reasons: First because Morgan seemed to imply that he had heard a conversation between another TV presenter Ulrika Jonsson and England football manager Sven-Goran Eriksson. "I don't know if he was repeating a conversation he had heard or he was imagining this conversation," Paxman said, according to Sky News.

Later during that lunch, said Paxman, Morgan asked him if he had a password on his mobile's voicemail. "He then explained the way to get access to people's messages was to go to the factory default setting and press either 0000 or 1234 and that if you didn't put on your own code, his words, 'You're a fool'," Paxman said.

Morgan replied to news cheekily on Twitter.

"Right - that's the last time I'm inviting Jeremy Paxman to lunch. Ungrateful little wretch," he tweeted.

Morgan was the editor of News of the World, a Rupert Murdoch-owned tabloid that has been at the center of a scandal about illegal wiretapping.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/201 ... ow-to-hack

Piers Morgan was sacked as the editor of the Daily Mirror last night as the newspaper's board made an unreserved apology for publishing fake pictures of British troops torturing Iraqi prisoners

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... rture.html

Gun control may not work-- Piers control does not work.

Was just pulling your leg,couldn`t help myself.

Pinky wrote: It's a semiautomatic only, pistol-caliber carbine with a 10-round magazine. Anyone who thinks it looks, quacks, smells or shits like an assault rifle is ignorant at best.

What does it do differently from my M-16 and M-4 that I carried around for a year? Other than a smaller magazine. How does its design point differ?

A clip is internal to the weapon and a magazine is external.

DARTH wrote: BTW NAFOD you were in the fucking military, they are called magazines not clips.

Its what the guy in the website called it. I dont know how it feeds.

OK I googled, you can buy tec 9 magazines at tec-9-clips.buycheapr.com. LOL.

We should be happy the nutters aren`t walking around with belt-fed machinery.

nafod wrote:

Pinky wrote: It's a semiautomatic only, pistol-caliber carbine with a 10-round magazine. Anyone who thinks it looks, quacks, smells or shits like an assault rifle is ignorant at best.

What does it do differently from my M-16 and M-4 that I carried around for a year? Other than a smaller magazine. How does its design point differ?

It doesn't fire a rifle round, and it is not capable of automatic fire. Either one of those is enough to disqualify it from being an actual assault rifle.

It also doesn't work with anything close to a 30 round magazine, which disqualifies it from the Clinton definition of assault rifle.

Finally, if the original 995 weighed as much as the newer TS series of Hi Point carbines, it's heavier than your M4.

On the other hand, it does have plastic parts and it goes bang, just like an assault rifle.

Pinky wrote:

nafod wrote:

Pinky wrote: It's a semiautomatic only, pistol-caliber carbine with a 10-round magazine. Anyone who thinks it looks, quacks, smells or shits like an assault rifle is ignorant at best.

What does it do differently from my M-16 and M-4 that I carried around for a year? Other than a smaller magazine. How does its design point differ?

On the other hand, it does have plastic parts and it goes bang, just like an assault rifle.

Fuck, we need to get this verbiage into the bill! Great stuff, keep up the good work!

Maybe we could add some pictures, just to sweeten the deal.

Pinky wrote:

nafod wrote:

Pinky wrote: It's a semiautomatic only, pistol-caliber carbine with a 10-round magazine. Anyone who thinks it looks, quacks, smells or shits like an assault rifle is ignorant at best.

What does it do differently from my M-16 and M-4 that I carried around for a year? Other than a smaller magazine. How does its design point differ?

It doesn't fire a rifle round, and it is not capable of automatic fire. Either one of those is enough to disqualify it from being an actual assault rifle.

It also doesn't work with anything close to a 30 round magazine, which disqualifies it from the Clinton definition of assault rifle.

Finally, if the original 995 weighed as much as the newer TS series of Hi Point carbines, it's heavier than your M4.

On the other hand, it does have plastic parts and it goes bang, just like an assault rifle.

Same weight as an M4, less than the M16. All three are semiauto only. All three have similar geometry with barrel in-line stock, raised sightlines, and light caliber to minimize recoil for rapid "close-in social work" as the YouTube guy called it. Rails for attaching all of your cool tactical geegaws. Range is plenty for neighborhood firefighter plinking, mall foodcourts, and K-12 targets. Only pistol caliber, but again just fine for shoppers and firefighters. Aftermarket 15 rd mag for the 995 versus 30 rds for the M4 and M16 is the only difference that potentially matters for the close-in social work.

DPR wrote:A clip is internal to the weapon and a magazine is external.

This is one of those facts that folks with a little knowledge like to trot out and smugly correct others to prove how much they know.

"How many rounds fit in this magazine?"

"Um, actually, that's not a magazine."

Fuck off you twat!

I was just listening to the news , subject was Times square celebration, and they were listing out all the weapons that the police would be wielding. Not sure if they were trying to scare us or make us feel safe.

protobuilder wrote:

DPR wrote:A clip is internal to the weapon and a magazine is external.

This is one of those facts that folks with a little knowledge like to trot out and smugly correct others to prove how much they know.

"How many rounds fit in this magazine?"

"Um, actually, that's not a magazine."

Fuck off you twat!

No it points out they know not what they speak of and should shut their cocksucker when around those who do.

I'm not going to give grammer lessons, if you don;t know a clip from a mag then you don't spout shit restricting things you know little about from others who do.

DARTH wrote:

protobuilder wrote:

DPR wrote:A clip is internal to the weapon and a magazine is external.

This is one of those facts that folks with a little knowledge like to trot out and smugly correct others to prove how much they know.

"How many rounds fit in this magazine?"

"Um, actually, that's not a magazine."

Fuck off you twat!

I'm not going to give grammer lessons

Heh heh heh.





Sorry couldn't resist.

nafod wrote:

Pinky wrote:

nafod wrote:

Pinky wrote: It's a semiautomatic only, pistol-caliber carbine with a 10-round magazine. Anyone who thinks it looks, quacks, smells or shits like an assault rifle is ignorant at best.

What does it do differently from my M-16 and M-4 that I carried around for a year? Other than a smaller magazine. How does its design point differ?

It doesn't fire a rifle round, and it is not capable of automatic fire. Either one of those is enough to disqualify it from being an actual assault rifle.

It also doesn't work with anything close to a 30 round magazine, which disqualifies it from the Clinton definition of assault rifle.

Finally, if the original 995 weighed as much as the newer TS series of Hi Point carbines, it's heavier than your M4.

On the other hand, it does have plastic parts and it goes bang, just like an assault rifle.

Same weight as an M4, less than the M16. All three are semiauto only. All three have similar geometry with barrel in-line stock, raised sightlines, and light caliber to minimize recoil for rapid "close-in social work" as the YouTube guy called it. Rails for attaching all of your cool tactical geegaws. Range is plenty for neighborhood firefighter plinking, mall foodcourts, and K-12 targets. Only pistol caliber, but again just fine for shoppers and firefighters. Aftermarket 15 rd mag for the 995 versus 30 rds for the M4 and M16 is the only difference that potentially matters for the close-in social work.

The M4 and M16 are not semiautomatic only, and they fire a more potent round. They are assault rifles. The 995 is not. None of your fantasies about using it to massacre people will change that.

Pinky wrote:The M4 and M16 are not semiautomatic only

They have no auto mode. They have a three round burst mode that you're taught never to use in the first place. Wastes ammo and misses target. No auto. M16A2 (my issued weapon) and M4.

As for fantasies of soft targets, obviously some folks out there have them. I don't. I don't even own a weapon. I just borrow them from the taxpayers for work.

nafod wrote:

Pinky wrote:The M4 and M16 are not semiautomatic only

They have no auto mode. They have a three round burst mode...

I.e., they are not semiautomatic only. Selective fire is one of the defining characteristics of an assault rifle. No semiautomatic-only rifle is an assault rifle.

Firing a rifle round is also required to be an assault rifle. Nothing chambered in 9mm is an assault rifle.

Why does this matter? The term "assault rifle" has been applied to the AR 15 and certain other semiautomatic rifles (including the 995 on occasion) because doing so is effective propaganda. It is inaccurate and dishonest, as is inventing terms like "assault weapon" and "assault clip". These terms are used as part of an attempt to portray weapons that are extremely popular among ordinary gun owners as "weapons of war" simply because they have black plastic in place of wood.

None of these terms belong in any "open and honest discussion" of civilian gun ownership.

Actually, I've come around to your way of thinking. The AWB isn't going to prevent Columbines, Sandy Hooks, etc. There will be plenty of firepower available via PCCs and whatnot to carry out the mayhem. All the AWB does is preserve fire superiority to the government.

Let me tell you where I am coming from, and then I'll (mostly) shut up on the issue. I spent three years of my life, including a year deployed away from my family, hunting terrorists. I still work in the business. I did it to protect country, friends, and family, especially my children. Every time we were successful, I imagined that's one less Beslan massacre to happen on our soil. And they plan for that shit. If one had occurred from our target set, it would have been unbearable that we had failed.

Well, guess what. We had one. But it wasn't mujahideen, it was one of us. We collectively failed.

So now I think about how to prevent the next one same as I thought about how to prevent foreign terrorists. You go after the money, the leadership, the motivation, the weapons, and ultimately the shooters themselves. Some folks can't be convinced. It is all on the table.

My kids are far more at risk to some kind of internal gun bullshit than they are to a terror strike.

The fact that our country is awash in guns to the point that any nutcase can easily get one is definitely a part of the problem. Period. NRA lobbying on behalf of the gun manufacturers is a part of the problem. Just follow the money.

I'd like to take a dump in Wayne LaPierre's mouth. His "press conference" a week after the shooting was basically and answer to the question, "how can we (NRA and gun manufacturers) make money off of Sandy Hook?"

First, the only way to stop a bad man with a gun (that we sold him directly or through a string of proxies) is a good man with a gun (that he needs to buy from us, thus expanding the total number of gun owners). CHA-Ching!

Second, we need guards at every K-12 school in the country. There are about 100,000 elementary schools in the US x 3 guards/school (is that enough?) x 1 Baretta 9mm or equivalent each (should they have two weapons?) x about $600 each is $180,000,000 right there, before you toss in middle school, junior high and high schools. Think some NRA lobbying bean counter hasn't done the math?

The NRA in its lobbying for the gun manufacturers absolutely benefits from an internal arms race between the bad guys they sell guns to and the good guys they sell guns to. More money for them, more hazard for us.

The whole fascination with Carbines and Bushmasters frankly smacks of cross fit-nut-huggery level of SWAT and SOF hero worship. Why do they all come in flat black? Is it because they are look TACTICAL HARD CORE!?! They should paint them all light pink. Easier to see the dirt and keep them clean.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ko_Et3MzlM[/youtube]

Very interesting exchange.

nafod wrote:I'd like to take a dump in Wayne LaPierre's mouth. His "press conference" a week after the shooting was basically and answer to the question, "how can we (NRA and gun manufacturers) make money off of Sandy Hook?"

First, the only way to stop a bad man with a gun (that we sold him directly or through a string of proxies) is a good man with a gun (that he needs to buy from us, thus expanding the total number of gun owners). CHA-Ching!

Second, we need guards at every K-12 school in the country. There are about 100,000 elementary schools in the US x 3 guards/school (is that enough?) x 1 Baretta 9mm or equivalent each (should they have two weapons?) x about $600 each is $180,000,000 right there, before you toss in middle school, junior high and high schools. Think some NRA lobbying bean counter hasn't done the math?

It took the cops 20 minutes to show up at Sandy Hook. Police routinely show up to mass shootings too late, unless you get lucky enough to have an off-duty cop there. Unarmed civilians have a better track record at stopping these shootings than cops do. Given 20 minutes with no armed response, a determined attacker could massacre children with machetes purchased from Lowes. (Granted, it would be more difficult, but still possible.)

But we're not willing to change that simple math. Ensuring that someone is available to protect our children is madness. It's a conspiracy! We're not even willing to hire more cops, which is shown to effectively lower the sort of crime that happens more regularly than school shootings.

Meanwhile many schools won't even give teachers reasonable instructions for dealing with this stuff. Their lawyers care nothing about bloodshed. They just don't want to be sued by the family of someone who was told that fighting back might be the best option. (I've started telling my classes to ignore our university's lawyer-written policy on active shooters.)

So this isn't a problem that warrants any extra protection for our children, but punishing millions of law-abiding gun owners is just fine?

Pinky wrote:a determined attacker could massacre children with machetes purchased from Lowes.

For a smart individual you make silly arguments on this subject. No one doubts someone COULD massacre with knives, machetes, etc... but you have to be shitting me if you think it would happen even a fraction of the time it does now.

Suburban white "killers" are pussies down deep, at least that's what seems to come out of all these school shootings. Pussies wouldn't have the cajones to go into a school and kill people with knives.

Who here can remember the first time they had to finish off their hunted wild game by knife. My initial shot from a distance was easy, but it was down right hard to look into their eyes and feel their breath and finish it with a blade.

There is absolutely no difference between this and the military's use of drones, even airplanes. Detached killing is much easier to initially accomplish.

BucketHead wrote:Suburban white "killers" are pussies down deep, at least that's what seems to come out of all these school shootings. Pussies wouldn't have the cajones to go into a school and kill people with knives.

Who here can remember the first time they had to finish off their hunted wild game by knife. My initial shot from a distance was easy, but it was down right hard to look into their eyes and feel their breath and finish it with a blade.

There is absolutely no difference between this and the military's use of drones, even airplanes. Detached killing is much easier to initially accomplish.

There's a very interesting book, "On Killing," that addresses this topic.