Gun Control is Completely Useless.

JamesBondo

House Member
Mar 3, 2012
4,156
35
48
If the 2nd ammendment was only about hunting rights...somewhere between the declaration of independence and the constitution hearings, the forefathers of America must have change their minds about 'we the people'
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
45,018
402
83
Washington DC
If the 2nd ammendment was only about hunting rights...somewhere between the declaration of independence and the constitution hearings, the forefathers of America must have change their minds about 'we the people'
Actually, the need for a militia presupposes not having a standing army, but it don't matter.

In the U.S., it don't even matter if you ban future sales of guns, with more guns than people in the country. You'd have to confiscate.

And that WOULD lead to rebellion, not just the Charge of the White Brigade.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Colpy

Danbones

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 23, 2015
23,731
1,693
113
Actually, the need for a militia presupposes not having a standing army, but it don't matter.

In the U.S., it don't even matter if you ban future sales of guns, with more guns than people in the country. You'd have to confiscate.

And that WOULD lead to rebellion, not just the Charge of the White Brigade.
LOL they will jut turn off your cable till you give them up Haha,
 

Danbones

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 23, 2015
23,731
1,693
113
Gotta love 30.06.

My father and his hunting buddies couldn't figure out why it barely went through the skull of the first deer he shot with his new rifle in the early 60s, till they realized it had gone straight through a 4 inch oak sapling first.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ron in Regina

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
45,018
402
83
Washington DC
Not to mention, it is both semi-automatic and twice as powerful as any 5.56 (like the AR 15) Thanks, Moms, for the laugh.
Twice? Four or five times, I'd say. Heck the ball is more'n three times as heavy as a standard 5.56. And a gigantic load of powder pushing it.

The Garand was overpowered, and the U.S. seriously debated going to a .308 (7.62x51). Reason they stuck with the .30.06 (7.62x63) is that the entire ammo industry was already tooled for it.

There was actually a thread of opinion in the U.S. military when I was in that the 5.56x45 was chosen because, in terms of combat effectiveness, it's actually better to f*ck up an enemy soldier than to kill him, because you tie up enemy resources in taking care of him.
 
Last edited:

Danbones

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 23, 2015
23,731
1,693
113
Twice? Four or five times, I'd say. Heck the ball is more'n three times as heavy as a standard 5.56. And a gigantic load of powder pushing it.

The Garand was overpowered, and the U.S. seriously debated going to a .308 (7.62x51). Reason they stuck with the .30.06 (7.62x63) is that the entire ammo industry was already tooled for it.

There was actually a thread of opinion in the U.S. military when I was in that the 5.56x45 was chosen because, in terms of combat effectiveness, it's actually better to f*ck up an enemy soldier than to kill him, because you tie up enemy resources in taking care of him.
Naw, it's because getting the job done right with one round is beyond a lot of you rapid fire/short range type shooters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: taxslave

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,677
310
83
66
Saint John, N.B.
Twice? Four or five times, I'd say. Heck the ball is more'n three times as heavy as a standard 5.56. And a gigantic load of powder pushing it.

The Garand was overpowered, and the U.S. seriously debated going to a .308 (7.62x51). Reason they stuck with the .30.06 (7.62x63) is that the entire ammo industry was already tooled for it.

There was actually a thread of opinion in the U.S. military when I was in that the 5.56x45 was chosen because, in terms of combat effectiveness, it's actually better to f*ck up an enemy soldier than to kill him, because you tie up enemy resources in taking care of him.
Yeah. I was basing power on muzzle energy stats..........which makes the .30-06 something a little over twice as powerful.

And yeah, I heard the 5.56 ability to wound was the reason it was adopted..........but I think a more reasonable explanation is the weight of the ammunition. It weighs one half the weight of a 7.62 x 51 NATO round, so a soldier can carry twice as much ammunition.

A lot of reasons went into the decision, I imagine.
 

Danbones

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 23, 2015
23,731
1,693
113
Damn, one should NEVER handle an illegal weapon of any kind or the parts with your bare fingers, FFS.
;)
even if you intend to keep it.

just sayin...

Also one would be well advised to never make ILLEGAL deals of any kind on camera as well.