|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#251
|
|||
|
|||
Really, really dumb
On 1/17/2020 12:35 PM, AMuzi wrote:
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).Â* 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. Can we return to what was actually said, please? The actual point I was discussing was Tom's claim: "A .22 long rifle is at LEAST as deadly as the .223 AR-15." That was and remains bull****, no matter how much people try to sidestep into other matters. -- - Frank Krygowski |
Ads |
#252
|
|||
|
|||
Really, really dumb
On Friday, January 17, 2020 at 7:38:10 PM UTC, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/17/2020 12:35 PM, AMuzi wrote: 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).Â* 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. Can we return to what was actually said, please? The actual point I was discussing was Tom's claim: "A .22 long rifle is at LEAST as deadly as the .223 AR-15." That was and remains bull****, no matter how much people try to sidestep into other matters. -- - Frank Krygowski Bloody hell, Krygowski, I know next to nothing about guns and could care less (sorry, y'all NRA stalwarts but I'm more into internal combustion; all the firearms I've ever owned or used were given to, issued to me, or inherited by me) but even I know that a .22 long rifle is a dangerous craftsman's tool, whereas a .223 AR15 is an American Kalashnikov, crap in almost anyone's hands, good only for short range spraying of bullets in the hope that one of the many bullets hits bone and starts tumbling. It was the perfect weapon of an army that doesn't exist any more -- a half-trained conscript army fighting in a jungle where one would come on the enemy suddenly at a range of a few feet, rather than today's professional army fighting in open deserts. Ande Jute Some people would look a lot wiser if they kept their mouth firmly shut |
#253
|
|||
|
|||
Really, really dumb
On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 08:01:09 -0600, 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? 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. The current thought is to do away with the .22 caliber M-16 cartridge and the new standard will be a cartridge in the 6.5 - 7mm range which would increase both accurate range and allow the use of squad level machine guns in the same caliber. -- cheers, John B. |
#254
|
|||
|
|||
Really, really dumb
On Friday, January 17, 2020 at 1:37:07 PM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote:
On Friday, January 17, 2020 at 7:38:10 PM UTC, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 1/17/2020 12:35 PM, AMuzi wrote: 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).Â* 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. Can we return to what was actually said, please? The actual point I was discussing was Tom's claim: "A .22 long rifle is at LEAST as deadly as the .223 AR-15." That was and remains bull****, no matter how much people try to sidestep into other matters. -- - Frank Krygowski Bloody hell, Krygowski, I know next to nothing about guns and could care less (sorry, y'all NRA stalwarts but I'm more into internal combustion; all the firearms I've ever owned or used were given to, issued to me, or inherited by me) but even I know that a .22 long rifle is a dangerous craftsman's tool, whereas a .223 AR15 is an American Kalashnikov, crap in almost anyone's hands, good only for short range spraying of bullets in the hope that one of the many bullets hits bone and starts tumbling. It was the perfect weapon of an army that doesn't exist any more -- a half-trained conscript army fighting in a jungle where one would come on the enemy suddenly at a range of a few feet, rather than today's professional army fighting in open deserts. Ande Jute Some people would look a lot wiser if they kept their mouth firmly shut Krygowski completely agrees with your "spraying" statement because he wants to believe that fully automatic and semi-automatic are the same thing. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
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 02:38 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 |