|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
Ads |
#592
|
|||
|
|||
Build it and they won't come
On 10/19/2017 2:24 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 10/19/2017 12:36 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 10/19/2017 1:56 AM, John B. wrote: On Wed, 18 Oct 2017 23:48:05 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: OK, I answered your question. You should now answer mine. How many rounds does a private citizen's gun really need to fire in a minute? And why? I really enjoy the sarcasm. But I would comment that RPM, rather than being some archaic number used in ancient times is the current standard method of measuring the speed at which a firearm fires. You're refusing to answer. I'm not asking about any "current standard method of measuring speed," because that's not what I'm interested in. Instead I'm asking how many rounds does a private citizen's gun really need to fire in one minute. Since you pretend to have trouble understanding that, let me illustrate: I start a stop watch. You start to shoot. In one minute, I say "STOP!" How many shots, during that minute, are the minimum necessary for practical purposes? And exactly why do you choose that number? But again, I find your question to be ambiguous at best. That's not a problem with the question. The real problem is you absolutely don't want to answer. Here's why I suspect you don't want to answer: It's because no hunter has a need to fire more than 10 rounds in one minute.Â* And if some evil person is invading your home, 10 shots within one minute should certainly convince him to go elsewhere. If a person is target shooting, 10 shots in a minute is fast enough. Yes, I know there are machine gun shoots, fast draw competitions and other weird hobbies. I have friends who attend those. But those are hardly necessary activities. They are play events for gun fetishists. Until you come up with real answers and real reasons, I'll assume you're simply refusing to admit your position is logically indefensible. I don't see why any of this matters... It matters because in situations like a nut job firing into a concert crowd, or shooting up a high school cafeteria, or killing people inside a church, or blasting up a night club, etc... in situations like that, guns that fire over 10 rounds within one minute do FAR more damage. It is FAR harder for security guards or police or near-mythical "good guys with guns" to stop the carnage. The only practical purpose of such guns is to do lots of killing in a target rich environment. I see no reason private citizens need that level of lethality. All other advanced countries control such guns far more rigidly than the U.S. Not only have their civilizations not collapsed; as a result of their laws, they have far fewer violence problems than the U.S. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#593
|
|||
|
|||
Build it and they won't come
On 10/19/2017 4:26 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes: On 10/19/2017 12:45 PM, wrote: On Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 8:50:27 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 10/18/2017 9:28 PM, AMuzi wrote: Licensed machine guns or light automatics used in any criminal manner at all are virtually unknown. I linked earlier to the numbers, something over 5,000 in Ohio alone. How about that? Gun control works! Apparently you refuse to understand that one nut does not a federal law require. You've forgotten that America has had many, many mass shootings in recent decades. You've forgotten that many more than one gun nut has been involved. You use a stupid "study" of "mass shootings" that are almost entirely gang warfare using guns that are already illegal to "prove" that we have to jump to your delinquent tune. Feel free to exempt gang warfare if you like, even though that's rather odd. (Do you think it should be allowed??) You're still left things like mass shootings of students in schools, people attending church, people at office parties, people in night clubs, people attending concerts. I suppose you must not remember those? Why don't you apply the hammer you're always harping on with bicycle related deaths, and compare actual death tolls? Like your odds, as a USAian, of being shot by police vs being shot by a total stranger in a mass shooting. OK, looks like data is soft; but what I'm finding indicates there might be, very roughly, 1,000 police killings per year. http://www.newsweek.com/how-many-ame...ch-year-480712 Most of those are almost certainly people who are confronted by cops as a result of some (alleged?) illegal activity on their part. Sorry, but that's not going to be me. But even so, there are at least 30 times as many non-police gun deaths in the U.S. This site https://twitter.com/GunDeaths lists 284 mass shootings so far in 2017. Since they're usually defined as four or more casualties, it's almost certain the total count of casualties is over 1000. Those are not deaths, of course; but unlike police actions, those are usually people not involved in law breaking at the time. I think you'll find that, while shootings are a problem in our country, the "newsworthy" incidents that have you so hyped up are, in fact, a "negligible" problem. I think all the gun deaths are a problem. Yes, even those where cops pulled the trigger. And I'll note that in countries not awash in guns, cops rarely have to kill anyone. The real gun problems a suicide, suicide, being killed by a "loved one", and, for young men, being killed while involved in criminal activity. Yes, those are problems too (although I would have listed suicide only once). The last one overlaps with the cop problem you brought up. I'll note again that all tend to be smaller problems in countries with rational gun control. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#594
|
|||
|
|||
Build it and they won't come
On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 13:36:53 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote: On 10/19/2017 1:56 AM, John B. wrote: On Wed, 18 Oct 2017 23:48:05 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: OK, I answered your question. You should now answer mine. How many rounds does a private citizen's gun really need to fire in a minute? And why? I really enjoy the sarcasm. But I would comment that RPM, rather than being some archaic number used in ancient times is the current standard method of measuring the speed at which a firearm fires. You're refusing to answer. I'm not asking about any "current standard method of measuring speed," because that's not what I'm interested in. Instead I'm asking how many rounds does a private citizen's gun really need to fire in one minute. Since you pretend to have trouble understanding that, let me illustrate: I start a stop watch. You start to shoot. In one minute, I say "STOP!" How many shots, during that minute, are the minimum necessary for practical purposes? And exactly why do you choose that number? But again, I find your question to be ambiguous at best. That's not a problem with the question. The real problem is you absolutely don't want to answer. No, you are being ambiguous. Your first cry was, if I remember correctly, was them guns fire too fast and you suggested some sort of button that had to be pushed before pulling the trigger. Now you are into "the minimum necessary for practical purposes?" Here's why I suspect you don't want to answer: It's because no hunter has a need to fire more than 10 rounds in one minute. And if some evil person is invading your home, 10 shots within one minute should certainly convince him to go elsewhere. If a person is target shooting, 10 shots in a minute is fast enough. Hunter? How did hunters get into the discussion? Do you feel that the only valid use of a firearm is the shoot a deer? As for not answering, I did answer, I referenced target shooting as that is definitive data. X rounds in Y time. And I furnished the data for pistols, rifles and shotguns. And I explained why I used that data as opposed to your hunting criteria which varies from none to five shots as fast as I could. You state above, "If a person is target shooting, 10 shots in a minute is fast enough." and this is after I carefully explained the requirement of all three of the common shooting sports. You say, 10 shots in a minute, i.e., 1 shot every 6 seconds when the reality is 5 shots in 10 seconds or three times the speed that you feel is the maximum required. Whether you cannot accept target shooting as a normal activity or you cannot calculate firearm requirements from the data I furnished I have no idea. But asking ambitious questions after the information has been furnish is rather revealing. Isn't it. As for the ambiguity of your question let me ask one,"I'm asking how many bicycles does a private citizen's need"? So tell us, how many? And, provide some accurate data to back up your assertion. Yes, I know there are machine gun shoots, fast draw competitions and other weird hobbies. I have friends who attend those. But those are hardly necessary activities. They are play events for gun fetishists. Yup, Weird play for gun fetishist.... I assume you are referring to the current 17 shooting events on the Olympic Games schedule. Until you come up with real answers and real reasons, I'll assume you're simply refusing to admit your position is logically indefensible. As I said, the sarcasm is interesting. Sort of a fall back when you can't accept reality. -- Cheers, John B. |
#595
|
|||
|
|||
Build it and they won't come
|
#596
|
|||
|
|||
Build it and they won't come
On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 14:00:00 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote: On 10/19/2017 12:45 PM, wrote: On Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 8:50:27 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 10/18/2017 9:28 PM, AMuzi wrote: Licensed machine guns or light automatics used in any criminal manner at all are virtually unknown. I linked earlier to the numbers, something over 5,000 in Ohio alone. How about that? Gun control works! Apparently you refuse to understand that one nut does not a federal law require. You've forgotten that America has had many, many mass shootings in recent decades. You've forgotten that many more than one gun nut has been involved. http://www.shootingtracker.com/Main_Page During the period 2013 - 2015 there were 89 people killed in "Mass Shootings" in the U.S.. During the same period there were 2,296 bicyclists kill in the U.S. Yes Sir! Gun control is absolutely necessary! -- Cheers, John B. |
#597
|
|||
|
|||
Build it and they won't come
On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 16:26:44 -0400, Radey Shouman
wrote: Frank Krygowski writes: On 10/19/2017 12:45 PM, wrote: On Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 8:50:27 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 10/18/2017 9:28 PM, AMuzi wrote: Licensed machine guns or light automatics used in any criminal manner at all are virtually unknown. I linked earlier to the numbers, something over 5,000 in Ohio alone. How about that? Gun control works! Apparently you refuse to understand that one nut does not a federal law require. You've forgotten that America has had many, many mass shootings in recent decades. You've forgotten that many more than one gun nut has been involved. You use a stupid "study" of "mass shootings" that are almost entirely gang warfare using guns that are already illegal to "prove" that we have to jump to your delinquent tune. Feel free to exempt gang warfare if you like, even though that's rather odd. (Do you think it should be allowed??) You're still left things like mass shootings of students in schools, people attending church, people at office parties, people in night clubs, people attending concerts. I suppose you must not remember those? Why don't you apply the hammer you're always harping on with bicycle related deaths, and compare actual death tolls? Like your odds, as a USAian, of being shot by police vs being shot by a total stranger in a mass shooting. I think you'll find that, while shootings are a problem in our country, the "newsworthy" incidents that have you so hyped up are, in fact, a "negligible" problem. The real gun problems a suicide, suicide, being killed by a "loved one", and, for young men, being killed while involved in criminal activity. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/mortality/lcwk9.htm Contains 113 causes of death in the U.S. Accidental firearm discharge is #100, Assault with a firearm is #107 and Firearm discharge cause unknown is #110. -- Cheers, John B. |
#598
|
|||
|
|||
Build it and they won't come
On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 17:13:35 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote: On 10/19/2017 4:26 PM, Radey Shouman wrote: Frank Krygowski writes: On 10/19/2017 12:45 PM, wrote: On Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 8:50:27 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 10/18/2017 9:28 PM, AMuzi wrote: Licensed machine guns or light automatics used in any criminal manner at all are virtually unknown. I linked earlier to the numbers, something over 5,000 in Ohio alone. How about that? Gun control works! Apparently you refuse to understand that one nut does not a federal law require. You've forgotten that America has had many, many mass shootings in recent decades. You've forgotten that many more than one gun nut has been involved. You use a stupid "study" of "mass shootings" that are almost entirely gang warfare using guns that are already illegal to "prove" that we have to jump to your delinquent tune. Feel free to exempt gang warfare if you like, even though that's rather odd. (Do you think it should be allowed??) You're still left things like mass shootings of students in schools, people attending church, people at office parties, people in night clubs, people attending concerts. I suppose you must not remember those? Why don't you apply the hammer you're always harping on with bicycle related deaths, and compare actual death tolls? Like your odds, as a USAian, of being shot by police vs being shot by a total stranger in a mass shooting. OK, looks like data is soft; but what I'm finding indicates there might be, very roughly, 1,000 police killings per year. http://www.newsweek.com/how-many-ame...ch-year-480712 Most of those are almost certainly people who are confronted by cops as a result of some (alleged?) illegal activity on their part. Sorry, but that's not going to be me. But even so, there are at least 30 times as many non-police gun deaths in the U.S. This site https://twitter.com/GunDeaths lists 284 mass shootings so far in 2017. Since they're usually defined as four or more casualties, it's almost certain the total count of casualties is over 1000. Those are not deaths, of course; but unlike police actions, those are usually people not involved in law breaking at the time. Are you sure that data is accurate? The Wikki has it that in 2017 there were 13 mass shootings to date in 2017? Deaths were 100, including the perpetrator if dead. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catego..._United_States -- Cheers, John B. |
#599
|
|||
|
|||
Build it and they won't come
On Thursday, October 19, 2017 at 11:00:07 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 10/19/2017 12:45 PM, wrote: On Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 8:50:27 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 10/18/2017 9:28 PM, AMuzi wrote: Licensed machine guns or light automatics used in any criminal manner at all are virtually unknown. I linked earlier to the numbers, something over 5,000 in Ohio alone. How about that? Gun control works! Apparently you refuse to understand that one nut does not a federal law require. You've forgotten that America has had many, many mass shootings in recent decades. You've forgotten that many more than one gun nut has been involved. You use a stupid "study" of "mass shootings" that are almost entirely gang warfare using guns that are already illegal to "prove" that we have to jump to your delinquent tune. Feel free to exempt gang warfare if you like, even though that's rather odd. (Do you think it should be allowed??) You're still left things like mass shootings of students in schools, people attending church, people at office parties, people in night clubs, people attending concerts. I suppose you must not remember those?... What I think is odd that you believe that drug gangs shooting each other with illegal weapons often gained from the police themselves which are illegal for convicted felons to own should be counted as some sort of crime that could be preventable. In case you were ever aware of it - criminals are called criminals because they commit crimes. It would NEVER occur to you that putting these criminals in jail for a period of time commensurate with their crimes might reduce them more effectively than ineffective and unconstitutional gun laws would. Do you know that in California gun battles on the freeways that involved innocent people driving along are likely to end in NO PROSECUTION if no injuries occur and the damage is paid for? With injuries, minimal time in jail if the injuries are not fatal? They have shot at each other in front of the Oakland main police station. |
#600
|
|||
|
|||
Build it and they won't come
On 10/20/2017 2:15 AM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 13:36:53 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 10/19/2017 1:56 AM, John B. wrote: On Wed, 18 Oct 2017 23:48:05 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: OK, I answered your question. You should now answer mine. How many rounds does a private citizen's gun really need to fire in a minute? And why? I really enjoy the sarcasm. But I would comment that RPM, rather than being some archaic number used in ancient times is the current standard method of measuring the speed at which a firearm fires. You're refusing to answer. I'm not asking about any "current standard method of measuring speed," because that's not what I'm interested in. Instead I'm asking how many rounds does a private citizen's gun really need to fire in one minute. Since you pretend to have trouble understanding that, let me illustrate: I start a stop watch. You start to shoot. In one minute, I say "STOP!" How many shots, during that minute, are the minimum necessary for practical purposes? And exactly why do you choose that number? But again, I find your question to be ambiguous at best. That's not a problem with the question. The real problem is you absolutely don't want to answer. No, you are being ambiguous. Your first cry was, if I remember correctly, was them guns fire too fast and you suggested some sort of button that had to be pushed before pulling the trigger. Now you are into "the minimum necessary for practical purposes?" Your memory is faulty. But in any case, why not answer the question I'm asking now? I've rephrased it several times hoping that you would A) understand, then B) really answer. How many rounds does a private citizen's gun really need to fire in one minute? And why do you pick that number? Here's why I suspect you don't want to answer: It's because no hunter has a need to fire more than 10 rounds in one minute. And if some evil person is invading your home, 10 shots within one minute should certainly convince him to go elsewhere. If a person is target shooting, 10 shots in a minute is fast enough. Hunter? How did hunters get into the discussion? HA HA HA HA! We're talking about practical uses for guns, and you're surprised hunters come up? John, that's amazing. :-) Do you feel that the only valid use of a firearm is the shoot a deer? No, I never hinted at that. Now answer the questions! As for not answering, I did answer, I referenced target shooting as that is definitive data. X rounds in Y time. And I furnished the data for pistols, rifles and shotguns. And I explained why I used that data as opposed to your hunting criteria which varies from none to five shots as fast as I could. You state above, "If a person is target shooting, 10 shots in a minute is fast enough." and this is after I carefully explained the requirement of all three of the common shooting sports. You say, 10 shots in a minute, i.e., 1 shot every 6 seconds when the reality is 5 shots in 10 seconds or three times the speed that you feel is the maximum required. Sigh. I asked about shots in one minute. You mentioned five shots in ten seconds for target competition. I said "And how long before the sixth shot?" I suspect it's longer than a minute. That means a gun that can fire no more than five shots in a minute meets your standard. I don't see how that can be difficult to understand. But to discuss your example more fully: If the game (because that's what it is) requires a higher number of shots within one minute than is beneficial for society as a whole, then change the damned rules of the game! Shooting game rules are not sacred! I _do_ know guys who enjoy machine gun shoots. They probably have rules for their games, too, but that doesn't mean that every dork with a tough-guy fantasy should be allowed to buy a machine gun. Whether you cannot accept target shooting as a normal activity or you cannot calculate firearm requirements from the data I furnished I have no idea. But asking ambitious questions after the information has been furnish is rather revealing. Isn't it. When you tell me how long it takes for you to make that sixth shot, I'll be able to say more. Your inability (or really, refusal) to give a simple number is much more revealing. Again: How many rounds does a private citizen really need to shoot within one minute? And then: Why? All that's required is one number and a simple explanation, not some diversion into shooting games. Nobody _really_ needs to play at shooting games. Yes, I know there are machine gun shoots, fast draw competitions and other weird hobbies. I have friends who attend those. But those are hardly necessary activities. They are play events for gun fetishists. Yup, Weird play for gun fetishist.... I assume you are referring to the current 17 shooting events on the Olympic Games schedule. And just LOOK at how fast these guys shoot in the Olympics! :-) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5yiOlJdrG0 -- - Frank Krygowski |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Can Women Build Big Muscles? Why Women Cant Build Big Muscles Easily | [email protected] | UK | 0 | February 16th 08 09:41 PM |
Anyone looking to build a bc? Free hazard hub with a Stockton build! | Evan Byrne | Unicycling | 5 | September 14th 06 09:59 AM |
Anyone looking to build a bc? Free hazard hub with a Stockton build! | Evan Byrne | Unicycling | 0 | August 25th 06 11:05 PM |
Disc Wheel Build Build Suggestions | osobailo | Techniques | 2 | October 5th 04 01:55 PM |
? - To build or not to build -- a bike - ? | Andrew Short | Techniques | 16 | August 4th 03 04:12 AM |