Assault Weapons are not real

[Hammerfest]

you think a dozen bouncers with side arms cant shoot 1 man with a rifle? outgunned my ass.....a shotgun behind the bar coulda handled him.

Pretty simple math, huh?

[Chrysia]

That was quite an emotional response there. That's also quite a spread of weapons there. A double-action rifle, then a light machine gun, followed by a submachine gun. The only one that really doesn't fit there is the AR-15... as it's not an automatic weapon. But I suppose if all you care about is that bullets come out of them, yeah I suppose you could lump them all together like that. Seems like a pretty sophomoric point of view though.

In context I'm assuming he's talking about the Sig Sauer MCX, the weapon the shooter actually used which is a 5.56x45 NATO rifle like the AR is. There really isn't an equivalent made under the AK. The Sig and the AR still aren't "particularly good at killing things" by any reasonable measure.

[Hammerfest]

In context I'm assuming he's talking about the Sig Sauer MCX, the weapon the shooter actually used which is a 5.56x45 NATO rifle like the AR is.

I assumed he was referring to a SIG MPX not an MCX. However, I feel I should point out that the AR-15 is a civilian rifle and therefore is not a NATO rifle.

[Heathy]

I think there may be a comparison made to like an AK-74 where the round is a bit smaller than a regular 7.62x39 vs the 5.45x39 that round is probably more closer to a 5.56 NATO round.

the 7.62 round is for what, penetrating hard cover like punching holes through concrete.

[Hammerfest]

the 7.62 round is for what, penetrating hard cover like punching holes through concrete.

We used 7.62 mm rounds for shooting sharks to keep them off the divers while they made external repairs to submarines. They were really good for that.

[Zeta333]

I assumed he was referring to a SIG MPX not an MCX. However, I feel I should point out that the AR-15 is a civilian rifle and therefore is not a NATO rifle.

I also dont think the Ak47 is an LMG. THe RPK is but not the AK47

[Chrysia]

I assumed he was referring to a SIG MPX not an MCX. However, I feel I should point out that the AR-15 is a civilian rifle and therefore is not a NATO rifle.

The AR-15 is built for 5.56x45 NATO standard ammo in the base package.

[Tempguy]

Eh. Just accept it. People are dumb. It's as real as people are making it.

Assault weapon (cause there are weapons not made for assault I guess)
Cis gender
Islamaphobia

Shit man, people are even bringing back the use of "colored people". ( "people of color" is the the same damn thing). So I say don't fight it. Just hope the hype dies down when AR's get banned and the gun death toll doesn't even move a tick.

- - - Updated - - -

The AR-15 is built for 5.56x45 NATO standard ammo in the base package.

Fun fact. NATO approved stuff is often weaker than civilian stuff. Half the shit Civs can buy is illegal for use in war. Hell, you aren't even allowed to sharpen a Bayonet too much.

[Kellhound]

I think you are talking about Cavitation here. It's actually one of the reasons why the 5.56 is so good at killing people. Because if it hits something dense enough it will tumble. That means a torso shot, or a shot in the head will fuck your shit up. But it also means it will very neatly go through drywall, or soft tissue and not stop.

The conditions when Cavitation can and cannot occur is not something I'm going to go into right now. If anything the fact it tumbles if it hits center mass adds to its effectiveness. It's not losing energy delivered on impact, it's simply distributing it better, in certain conditions.

- - - Updated - - -



Yet.they.didn't.

You are still not getting it. Real life =/= your imagination.

The 5.56 is a derivative of a varmint round. It was intended to wound not kill. It is so underpowered it is illegal to use on most big game animals in most (if not all) states.

[Gorgodeus]

That's not 'full-auto'. It is still one bullet per trigger pull. It essentially just takes the trigger pull, creep, and reset down quite a bit.

It effectively turns the gun into full auto. Did you even bother watching the video?

[Kellhound]

I think there may be a comparison made to like an AK-74 where the round is a bit smaller than a regular 7.62x39 vs the 5.45x39 that round is probably more closer to a 5.56 NATO round.

the 7.62 round is for what, penetrating hard cover like punching holes through concrete.

The 5.56X45 and the 5.45x39 are very comparable. NATO doesnt have a widely used equivalent of the 7.62x39. The 7.62x51 and 7.62x54R are very similar.

- - - Updated - - -

I also dont think the Ak47 is an LMG. THe RPK is but not the AK47

I wouldnt really call the RPK a LMG either, it is just an AKM with a longer barrel. It cannot sustain fire long without overheating and it cannot swap the barrel.

As a side note, what most people call AK-47s are actually AKMs.

[Chrysia]

As a side note, what most people call AK-47s are actually AKMs.

The AKM is realistically just an AK-47 slightly redesigned to take advantage of modern materials.

[Orange Joe]

I'm just going to leave this here.

http://www.assaultweapon.info/

[Ghâzh]

I own zero firearms, but you're talking out your ass here. Rifle fire is slightly more effective than pistol fire due to barrel length, but the additional power is often offset by the disadvantages of trying to utilize a long gun in close proximity to your target. Pistols kill far, far more people than rifles, because they're much more effective in the tips of situation where two humans are likely to want to kill one another outside of war.

The barrel length isn't as big of an inconvenience as people think it is. You don't shoot a handgun by holding it next to your body either. Usually you keep your hands
in front of you for stability.

And talking about stability, it's the other major advantage over fire power. A rifle is infinitely easier to aim with and hit accurately.

[Orange Joe]

The barrel length isn't as big of an inconvenience as people think it is. You don't shoot a handgun by holding it next to your body either. Usually you keep your hands
in front of you for stability.

And talking about stability, it's the other major advantage over fire power. A rifle is infinitely easier to aim with and hit accurately.

Pretty sure they mean for concealment and carrying. not shooting.

[Chrysia]

The barrel length isn't as big of an inconvenience as people think it is. You don't shoot a handgun by holding it next to your body either. Usually you keep your hands
in front of you for stability.

And talking about stability, it's the other major advantage over fire power. A rifle is infinitely easier to aim with and hit accurately.

Concealment, carrying, clearing obstructions, maintaining control, and avoiding being disarmed are what I'm talking about. Why did you assume I was talking about stability in regards to long guns? Long guns are almost universally a more stable platform for firing than handguns, at least on a single shot. Whether it's more stable for successive shots depends on too many other factors to say without discussing specific firearms.

[Totle]

So you would be fine if they say semi-automatic weapons? Doesn't make a difference though as the AR-15 is just the civilian form of the M-16.

Do you understand what semi-automatic is because your comparison is misleading.

The AR-15 is semi-automatic the same way a 6-shooter revolver is semi-automatic.

[Ghâzh]

Concealment, carrying, clearing obstructions, maintaining control, and avoiding being disarmed are what I'm talking about. Why did you assume I was talking about stability in regards to long guns? Long guns are almost universally a more stable platform for firing than handguns, at least on a single shot. Whether it's more stable for successive shots depends on too many other factors to say without discussing specific firearms.

I guess I jumped the gun there.

Although I wasn't implying that you talked about stability. It was just something I added as the major advantage over the handgun. I can give you concealment, carrying and clearing obstructions but maintaining control and avoiding being disarmed are rifle advantages.

There's a reason why the handgun is considered a sidearm. It's easy to carry and a great backup weapon. However there's not single job I'd pick it over a rifle when the need to conceal it or the ease of carriage weren't concerned.

[oxymoronic]

Actualy no. II have no constitutional right to own a gun. I live in Norway - where we generaly don't kill people, not even the cops.

you think USA generally kills people, even cops? so like everyday in every city there is a murder? is that how you are? please let us know/.

[Chrysia]

I guess I jumped the gun there.

Although I wasn't implying that you talked about stability. It was just something I added as the major advantage over the handgun. I can give you concealment, carrying and clearing obstructions but maintaining control and avoiding being disarmed are rifle advantages.

There's a reason why the handgun is considered a sidearm. It's easy to carry and a great backup weapon. However there's not single job I'd pick it over a rifle when the need to conceal it or the ease of carriage weren't concerned.

Considering the topic of discussion, ease of carrying and concealment are a concern, and will be increasingly so if current trends prevail.

Maintaining control has far more factors than firing stability, and handguns don't always lose to a comparable caliber rifle on firing stability to begin with.

I'll admit I jumped the gun a bit too, as I can't really say for certain whether it's easier to actually disarm a person of a rifle or pistol, but there's a whole lot more rifle to grab, so it's much easier to establish some measure of control over an opponents rifle if it comes to being that close.