| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#11
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
GOP Senator Tells Americans to "Get Small"
On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 06:40:33 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote: In article , says... On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 10:53:45 -0700 (PDT), Tim wrote: 11:05 AMBoating All Out Excerpt from http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/10/senators- strategy-to-combat-gun-violence-get-small.html "Leading the charge on Tuesday was South Dakota senator John Thune, who said in an interview with NBC News that, given the fact that there?s no way to stop a mass shooting from happening in an ?open society,? citizens? best hope to avoid being violently killed is to ? duck. ?I think people are going to have to take steps in their own lives to take precautions to protect themselves. And in situations like that, you know, try to stay safe. As somebody said ? get small.? It was the most depressing Republican response to the shooting until slightly later in the afternoon, when Oklahoma senator James Inhofe (famous for holding up a snowball to disprove climate change) pinned the responsibility for Sunday night?s massacre on sanctuary cities." Hahahaha. What the hell is he talking about? One round from a bazooka could have taken out the shooter. The obvious solution is to legalize bazooka open-carry. Then the crowd would have handled it. The problem is the law prevents bazooka open-carry. What are our politicians thinking? ... What are they thinking? I believe they're not. Anyhow his statement makes about as much sense as blowing a shotgun in the air off your balcony... I agree Biden was just being stupid and the "bazooka" thing is pretty stupid too. They are not that accurate to start with, unless you are talking about a modern laser guided anti tank weapon. Then there is the collateral damage problem. Look up M72 LAW. Replace the word "bazooka" with whatever version of LAW is appropriate, and legalize them for open carry. Biden is a hell of a lot closer to my reality than that asshole Thune telling me to "get small." Collateral damage? Less than 58 dead concert goers I'd bet. One round just close would take the perp out. Price of Freedom. Get some Army/Marine LAWS trainers to train open carry applicants down at the local range. There would be no shortage of applicants. Open carry ticket for LAWS and toting one at a concert - how cool is that? What's not to like about it? Better than carrying a tricked out boom box. Brain fart. If we really thought this would be a thing, the answer would have been SWAT snipers covering the buildings from other buildings. If Trump had been there, the snipers would have been there. (ever since Dallas) It would have stopped in about 20-30 seconds if there was anyone qualified to shoot back at that guy. Couple hundred rounds could land on the Presidential convoy before then. Besides, too expensive for widespread use. Full auto fire raining down from high elevation has changed the game for the Secret Service. They might be considering LAWS teams for the Presidential detail. You "staying small?" It is more likely that he snipers would have fired on those broken windows before he ever fired a shot. BTW You seem fascinated about a 50 year old weapons system that is not even widely used by our allies these days. You are just brain farting |
|
#12
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
GOP Senator Tells Americans to "Get Small"
On Thu, 05 Oct 2017 09:54:16 -0400, John H
wrote: On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 06:40:33 -0500, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 10:53:45 -0700 (PDT), Tim wrote: 11:05 AMBoating All Out Excerpt from http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/10/senators- strategy-to-combat-gun-violence-get-small.html "Leading the charge on Tuesday was South Dakota senator John Thune, who said in an interview with NBC News that, given the fact that there?s no way to stop a mass shooting from happening in an ?open society,? citizens? best hope to avoid being violently killed is to ? duck. ?I think people are going to have to take steps in their own lives to take precautions to protect themselves. And in situations like that, you know, try to stay safe. As somebody said ? get small.? It was the most depressing Republican response to the shooting until slightly later in the afternoon, when Oklahoma senator James Inhofe (famous for holding up a snowball to disprove climate change) pinned the responsibility for Sunday night?s massacre on sanctuary cities." Hahahaha. What the hell is he talking about? One round from a bazooka could have taken out the shooter. The obvious solution is to legalize bazooka open-carry. Then the crowd would have handled it. The problem is the law prevents bazooka open-carry. What are our politicians thinking? ... What are they thinking? I believe they're not. Anyhow his statement makes about as much sense as blowing a shotgun in the air off your balcony... I agree Biden was just being stupid and the "bazooka" thing is pretty stupid too. They are not that accurate to start with, unless you are talking about a modern laser guided anti tank weapon. Then there is the collateral damage problem. Look up M72 LAW. Replace the word "bazooka" with whatever version of LAW is appropriate, and legalize them for open carry. Biden is a hell of a lot closer to my reality than that asshole Thune telling me to "get small." Collateral damage? Less than 58 dead concert goers I'd bet. One round just close would take the perp out. Price of Freedom. Get some Army/Marine LAWS trainers to train open carry applicants down at the local range. There would be no shortage of applicants. Open carry ticket for LAWS and toting one at a concert - how cool is that? What's not to like about it? Better than carrying a tricked out boom box. If we really thought this would be a thing, the answer would have been SWAT snipers covering the buildings from other buildings. If Trump had been there, the snipers would have been there. (ever since Dallas) It would have stopped in about 20-30 seconds if there was anyone qualified to shoot back at that guy. Couple hundred rounds could land on the Presidential convoy before then. Besides, too expensive for widespread use. Full auto fire raining down from high elevation has changed the game for the Secret Service. They might be considering LAWS teams for the Presidential detail. You "staying small?" Effective range for a LAW is about 250 meters (with a *lot* of practice), and that's not shooting up 32 floors. I think I saw the range for the shooter in Vegas was about 600 yards. BAO has just watched too many Dirty Harry movies. He also does not understand that these are shaped charges that basically poke a hole in something. It is not going to blast out several rooms. I have also heard the range was more like 300 yards. When you look at the ballistics of the 5.56 (.223) you see that out beyond around 300 yards the bullet starts dropping pretty fast. Unless he was shooting tracers and walking the rounds in it is unlikely they would have been that effective. I read one person saying 1000 yards and that would have required holding 50-60 feet high. This was a fat retired clerk, not Chris Kyle. |
|
#14
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
GOP Senator Tells Americans to "Get Small"
On Thu, 05 Oct 2017 11:36:52 -0400, wrote:
On Thu, 05 Oct 2017 09:54:16 -0400, John H wrote: On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 06:40:33 -0500, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 10:53:45 -0700 (PDT), Tim wrote: 11:05 AMBoating All Out Excerpt from http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/10/senators- strategy-to-combat-gun-violence-get-small.html "Leading the charge on Tuesday was South Dakota senator John Thune, who said in an interview with NBC News that, given the fact that there?s no way to stop a mass shooting from happening in an ?open society,? citizens? best hope to avoid being violently killed is to ? duck. ?I think people are going to have to take steps in their own lives to take precautions to protect themselves. And in situations like that, you know, try to stay safe. As somebody said ? get small.? It was the most depressing Republican response to the shooting until slightly later in the afternoon, when Oklahoma senator James Inhofe (famous for holding up a snowball to disprove climate change) pinned the responsibility for Sunday night?s massacre on sanctuary cities." Hahahaha. What the hell is he talking about? One round from a bazooka could have taken out the shooter. The obvious solution is to legalize bazooka open-carry. Then the crowd would have handled it. The problem is the law prevents bazooka open-carry. What are our politicians thinking? ... What are they thinking? I believe they're not. Anyhow his statement makes about as much sense as blowing a shotgun in the air off your balcony... I agree Biden was just being stupid and the "bazooka" thing is pretty stupid too. They are not that accurate to start with, unless you are talking about a modern laser guided anti tank weapon. Then there is the collateral damage problem. Look up M72 LAW. Replace the word "bazooka" with whatever version of LAW is appropriate, and legalize them for open carry. Biden is a hell of a lot closer to my reality than that asshole Thune telling me to "get small." Collateral damage? Less than 58 dead concert goers I'd bet. One round just close would take the perp out. Price of Freedom. Get some Army/Marine LAWS trainers to train open carry applicants down at the local range. There would be no shortage of applicants. Open carry ticket for LAWS and toting one at a concert - how cool is that? What's not to like about it? Better than carrying a tricked out boom box. If we really thought this would be a thing, the answer would have been SWAT snipers covering the buildings from other buildings. If Trump had been there, the snipers would have been there. (ever since Dallas) It would have stopped in about 20-30 seconds if there was anyone qualified to shoot back at that guy. Couple hundred rounds could land on the Presidential convoy before then. Besides, too expensive for widespread use. Full auto fire raining down from high elevation has changed the game for the Secret Service. They might be considering LAWS teams for the Presidential detail. You "staying small?" Effective range for a LAW is about 250 meters (with a *lot* of practice), and that's not shooting up 32 floors. I think I saw the range for the shooter in Vegas was about 600 yards. BAO has just watched too many Dirty Harry movies. He also does not understand that these are shaped charges that basically poke a hole in something. It is not going to blast out several rooms. I have also heard the range was more like 300 yards. When you look at the ballistics of the 5.56 (.223) you see that out beyond around 300 yards the bullet starts dropping pretty fast. Unless he was shooting tracers and walking the rounds in it is unlikely they would have been that effective. I read one person saying 1000 yards and that would have required holding 50-60 feet high. This was a fat retired clerk, not Chris Kyle. Looks like he was shooting at a range of about 1100 feet. So you heard pretty close. This article sums it up pretty well. I don't think he'd need to be much of a marksman to hit something in a target area that big, especially shooting from 320 up. http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-las...htmlstory.html I've no idea where BAO came up with the LAW idea. He's obviously never fired one, or know much about it. You're right. Shaped charge. Makes a little hole. |
|
#15
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
GOP Senator Tells Americans to "Get Small"
On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 12:02:26 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/5/17 11:36 AM, wrote: BAO has just watched too many Dirty Harry movies. He also does not understand that these are shaped charges that basically poke a hole in something. It is not going to blast out several rooms. I have also heard the range was more like 300 yards. When you look at the ballistics of the 5.56 (.223) you see that out beyond around 300 yards the bullet starts dropping pretty fast. Unless he was shooting tracers and walking the rounds in it is unlikely they would have been that effective. I read one person saying 1000 yards and that would have required holding 50-60 feet high. This was a fat retired clerk, not Chris Kyle. "Better to think first in terms of mid-range, in the 400- to 600-yard ranges. For this type of shooting the .223 is ideal. In fact, there are shooters doing outstanding work at 1,000 yards with the .223 cartridge. But this is post-graduate stuff. For now let’s stay in the medium ranges." http://tinyurl.com/y95ov8x2 The shooter likely wasn't targeting individuals, but, rather, just shooting in tight bits of crowd. And I thought he had .308 rifles, too. Range wasn't an issue. You are talking about bench rest shooters (sighted in at the range they are shooting at) and this guy was shooting off hand with a bump stock. At 1000 yards those rounds would have been landing in the parking lot if he did not use tracers or something to walk in the fire. At 300 yards he could shoot point blank and only be a foot or so off. |
|
#16
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
GOP Senator Tells Americans to "Get Small"
11:36 On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 12:02:26 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 10/5/17 11:36 AM, wrote: BAO has just watched too many Dirty Harry movies. He also does not understand that these are shaped charges that basically poke a hole in something. It is not going to blast out several rooms. I have also heard the range was more like 300 yards. When you look at the ballistics of the 5.56 (.223) you see that out beyond around 300 yards the bullet starts dropping pretty fast. Unless he was shooting tracers and walking the rounds in it is unlikely they would have been that effective. I read one person saying 1000 yards and that would have required holding 50-60 feet high. This was a fat retired clerk, not Chris Kyle. "Better to think first in terms of mid-range, in the 400- to 600-yard ranges. For this type of shooting the .223 is ideal. In fact, there are shooters doing outstanding work at 1,000 yards with the .223 cartridge. But this is post-graduate stuff. For now let’s stay in the medium ranges." http://tinyurl.com/y95ov8x2 The shooter likely wasn't targeting individuals, but, rather, just shooting in tight bits of crowd. And I thought he had .308 rifles, too. Range wasn't an issue. You are talking about bench rest shooters (sighted in at the range they are shooting at) and this guy was shooting off hand with a bump stock. At 1000 yards those rounds would have been landing in the parking lot if he did not use tracers or something to walk in the fire. At 300 yards he could shoot point blank and only be a foot or so off. ..... You don't need much aiming and sight windage when you're spraying..223 down a huge crowded hole like that |
|
#17
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
GOP Senator Tells Americans to "Get Small"
On Thu, 05 Oct 2017 12:36:11 -0400, wrote:
On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 12:02:26 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 10/5/17 11:36 AM, wrote: BAO has just watched too many Dirty Harry movies. He also does not understand that these are shaped charges that basically poke a hole in something. It is not going to blast out several rooms. I have also heard the range was more like 300 yards. When you look at the ballistics of the 5.56 (.223) you see that out beyond around 300 yards the bullet starts dropping pretty fast. Unless he was shooting tracers and walking the rounds in it is unlikely they would have been that effective. I read one person saying 1000 yards and that would have required holding 50-60 feet high. This was a fat retired clerk, not Chris Kyle. "Better to think first in terms of mid-range, in the 400- to 600-yard ranges. For this type of shooting the .223 is ideal. In fact, there are shooters doing outstanding work at 1,000 yards with the .223 cartridge. But this is post-graduate stuff. For now let’s stay in the medium ranges." http://tinyurl.com/y95ov8x2 The shooter likely wasn't targeting individuals, but, rather, just shooting in tight bits of crowd. And I thought he had .308 rifles, too. Range wasn't an issue. You are talking about bench rest shooters (sighted in at the range they are shooting at) and this guy was shooting off hand with a bump stock. At 1000 yards those rounds would have been landing in the parking lot if he did not use tracers or something to walk in the fire. At 300 yards he could shoot point blank and only be a foot or so off. 300 yards was the far target for qualifying with the rifle during basic training. Couldn't be a foot off either! |
|
#18
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
GOP Senator Tells Americans to "Get Small"
On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 09:45:31 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote: 11:36 On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 12:02:26 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 10/5/17 11:36 AM, wrote: BAO has just watched too many Dirty Harry movies. He also does not understand that these are shaped charges that basically poke a hole in something. It is not going to blast out several rooms. I have also heard the range was more like 300 yards. When you look at the ballistics of the 5.56 (.223) you see that out beyond around 300 yards the bullet starts dropping pretty fast. Unless he was shooting tracers and walking the rounds in it is unlikely they would have been that effective. I read one person saying 1000 yards and that would have required holding 50-60 feet high. This was a fat retired clerk, not Chris Kyle. "Better to think first in terms of mid-range, in the 400- to 600-yard ranges. For this type of shooting the .223 is ideal. In fact, there are shooters doing outstanding work at 1,000 yards with the .223 cartridge. But this is post-graduate stuff. For now let’s stay in the medium ranges." http://tinyurl.com/y95ov8x2 The shooter likely wasn't targeting individuals, but, rather, just shooting in tight bits of crowd. And I thought he had .308 rifles, too. Range wasn't an issue. You are talking about bench rest shooters (sighted in at the range they are shooting at) and this guy was shooting off hand with a bump stock. At 1000 yards those rounds would have been landing in the parking lot if he did not use tracers or something to walk in the fire. At 300 yards he could shoot point blank and only be a foot or so off. .... You don't need much aiming and sight windage when you're spraying..223 down a huge crowded hole like that I am not going to do the trig right now but at a 17 degree angle, 60 feet of elevation is a pretty wide swath of the ground 1000 yards away. It has now been established that this was ~300 meters so this whole thing is moot anyway. |
|
#19
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
GOP Senator Tells Americans to "Get Small"
On Thu, 05 Oct 2017 13:20:02 -0400, John H
wrote: On Thu, 05 Oct 2017 12:36:11 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 12:02:26 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 10/5/17 11:36 AM, wrote: BAO has just watched too many Dirty Harry movies. He also does not understand that these are shaped charges that basically poke a hole in something. It is not going to blast out several rooms. I have also heard the range was more like 300 yards. When you look at the ballistics of the 5.56 (.223) you see that out beyond around 300 yards the bullet starts dropping pretty fast. Unless he was shooting tracers and walking the rounds in it is unlikely they would have been that effective. I read one person saying 1000 yards and that would have required holding 50-60 feet high. This was a fat retired clerk, not Chris Kyle. "Better to think first in terms of mid-range, in the 400- to 600-yard ranges. For this type of shooting the .223 is ideal. In fact, there are shooters doing outstanding work at 1,000 yards with the .223 cartridge. But this is post-graduate stuff. For now let’s stay in the medium ranges." http://tinyurl.com/y95ov8x2 The shooter likely wasn't targeting individuals, but, rather, just shooting in tight bits of crowd. And I thought he had .308 rifles, too. Range wasn't an issue. You are talking about bench rest shooters (sighted in at the range they are shooting at) and this guy was shooting off hand with a bump stock. At 1000 yards those rounds would have been landing in the parking lot if he did not use tracers or something to walk in the fire. At 300 yards he could shoot point blank and only be a foot or so off. 300 yards was the far target for qualifying with the rifle during basic training. Couldn't be a foot off either! .... but you were not trying to control a rifle with a bump stock and you were sighted in at 200, cranking in the necessary elevation for 300. |
|
#20
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
GOP Senator Tells Americans to "Get Small"
wrote:
On Thu, 05 Oct 2017 13:20:02 -0400, John H wrote: On Thu, 05 Oct 2017 12:36:11 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 12:02:26 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 10/5/17 11:36 AM, wrote: BAO has just watched too many Dirty Harry movies. He also does not understand that these are shaped charges that basically poke a hole in something. It is not going to blast out several rooms. I have also heard the range was more like 300 yards. When you look at the ballistics of the 5.56 (.223) you see that out beyond around 300 yards the bullet starts dropping pretty fast. Unless he was shooting tracers and walking the rounds in it is unlikely they would have been that effective. I read one person saying 1000 yards and that would have required holding 50-60 feet high. This was a fat retired clerk, not Chris Kyle. "Better to think first in terms of mid-range, in the 400- to 600-yard ranges. For this type of shooting the .223 is ideal. In fact, there are shooters doing outstanding work at 1,000 yards with the .223 cartridge. But this is post-graduate stuff. For now let’s stay in the medium ranges." http://tinyurl.com/y95ov8x2 The shooter likely wasn't targeting individuals, but, rather, just shooting in tight bits of crowd. And I thought he had .308 rifles, too. Range wasn't an issue. You are talking about bench rest shooters (sighted in at the range they are shooting at) and this guy was shooting off hand with a bump stock. At 1000 yards those rounds would have been landing in the parking lot if he did not use tracers or something to walk in the fire. At 300 yards he could shoot point blank and only be a foot or so off. 300 yards was the far target for qualifying with the rifle during basic training. Couldn't be a foot off either! ... but you were not trying to control a rifle with a bump stock and you were sighted in at 200, cranking in the necessary elevation for 300. Effective range less than 300. Shooting downhill. That 200 meter sight might be correct for a 300’ elevation. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| " Butt Plug Junior" Ingersoll...rec boats latest "stalker " | General | |||
| Would Sotomayor Exonerate Bill Richardson & His "Moving AmericaForward" "Latino Voter Registration" Scam? | General | |||
| "For Illegal Aliens, Crime Pays - and So Do We": A Shocking Report All Americans Need to Read | General | |||
Linear Mode
