|
Volcott posted:I'd really appreciate it if you guys could stop being mean to guns. Would you say that guns are people, my friend? 
Absurd Alhazred fucked around with this message at 10:20 on Aug 27, 2015 |
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 10:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 02:23 |
|
|
boom Although I will admit I don't really understand. Is it showing all cases where 4+ people were shot but not all of them lost their lives?
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 10:56
|
|
|
Guns are very important
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 11:43
|
|
|
Serious question: given how hard it is to categorise firearms (re: "assault weapons") - would it actually be feasible to do it on a gun-by-gun basis? Have some group vote on what is acceptable and what is not? Alternatively: how about anything with a capacity of more than eight bullets/shells should be illegal? SedanChair posted:Gun nuts like to scoff when people say "high-capacity magazines give you an unprecedented amount of firepower!" But I don't scoff because well, they do give you a lot of firepower, in your hand. And nutso spree shooters choose Glock for the same reason everybody else chooses it; you don't really have to aim. You don't! You've got a light trigger pull that is the same for every shot, and three times the capacity of a revolver. Just wave that bitch all over the place and yank on the trigger; it's better and easier to use than older designs. Remember, weapons are designed for people without a lot of training to use. And so by making a very simple and easy-to-use pistol, Gaston Glock solved "gun" like Sam Colt did, with a revolution in manufacturing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 12:02
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 12:16
|
|
|
GlennFinito posted:Guns are very important *Triumph the Insult Comedy Dog jumps in* "For me to poop on!"
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 12:32
|
|
|
if they take away my guns, what the h*ck am I supposed to do when I see black people in my neighborhood?? doesn't make sense imo, please consider this before posting again, op.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 12:33
|
|
|
I keep my guns in a locked safe because I feel that's the responsible thing to do.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 12:33
|
|
|
I mean, yes, that puts me at a disadvantage if someone tries to burgle me, but I live in the woods, not the inner city.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 12:35
|
|
|
Volcott posted:I mean, yes, that puts me at a disadvantage if someone tries to burgle me, but I live in the woods, not the inner city. My mom got a man sized gun safe just so she had a place for the guns she inherited. And she doesn't let anyone else see them. What are you hiding, mom?
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 12:55
|
|
|
Volcott posted:I mean, yes, that puts me at a disadvantage if someone tries to burgle me, but I live in the woods, not the inner city. Guns are one of the most commonly stolen items from homes so there's basically no reason to ever have one in your house that isn't in a safe that's also in another, larger, safe.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 12:57
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Guns are one of the most commonly stolen items from homes so there's basically no reason to ever have one in your house that isn't in a safe that's also in another, larger, safe. One safe is fine as long as you bolt it to the floor.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 12:59
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Guns are one of the most commonly stolen items from homes so there's basically no reason to ever have one in your house that isn't in a safe that's also in another, larger, safe. And then wrap chains and a lock around that safe to complete the Looney Tunes gag.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 13:07
|
|
|
Volcott posted:One safe is fine as long as you bolt it to the floor. Nah man, safes are like condoms. That's why I always wear six at a time when I get it on.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 13:14
|
|
|
My favorite gun is the one that shoots nukes. I want everyone to have a gun that shoots nukes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 13:15
|
|
|
Gravel Gravy posted:And then wrap chains and a lock around that safe to complete the Looney Tunes gag. Gunnitus Nutticus ---> <--- Armos Controllimus " Bang! Right in the kisser! "
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 13:19
|
|
|
Kenzie posted:My favorite gun is the one that shoots nukes. As history has shown, if everyone had a gun that shoots nukes no one would shoot their gun that shoots nukes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 13:22
|
|
|
Kenzie posted:My favorite gun is the one that shoots nukes. I prefer my nukes delivered via rocket.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 13:23
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:I prefer my nukes delivered via rocket. How do we feel about rocket guns? Not guns that shoot rockets but guns that shoot bullets that are propelled by miniature rockets like in You Only Live Twice. What advantage do rocket bullets have over normal bullets?
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 13:24
|
|
|
Gravel Gravy posted:How do we feel about rocket guns? Warhammer is for nerds.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 13:25
|
|
|
Gravel Gravy posted:How do we feel about rocket guns? Being rad as gently caress. Then you can crush your enemy under you bootheel and destroy them with your bolters.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 13:25
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:I prefer my nukes delivered via rocket. I prefer mine delivered by ridiculously impractical giant bipedal robot. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 13:26
|
|
|
I really think Turn A is the best, it really gets the idea of the series and genre down. Oh, Gun not Gundam   Guess we'll just keep having repeated shooting tragedies forever rather than be a first world nation. Like glorious Japan. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 13:27
|
|
|
Volcott posted:Warhammer is for nerds. I don't see what's nerdy about a white man traveling to Japan to become Japanese and have an Asian waifu where he trains and assaults secret volcano bases with an army of ninjas.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 13:27
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:I prefer mine delivered by ridiculously impractical giant bipedal robot. Ed 209 wept.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 13:28
|
|
|
A weapon to surpass Metal Gear.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 13:29
|
|
|
can we post our favorite urban mech cosplays
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 13:33
|
|
|
Gravel Gravy posted:How do we feel about rocket guns? They are extremely well suited to killing the traitor, the xeno, and the heretic.  Edit Volcott posted:Warhammer is for nerds. Nuh-uh
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 13:37
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:They are extremely well suited to killing the traitor, the xeno, and the heretic. Can't believe a space wars game co-opted from my 1960s Bond movie. Regret bringing it up, jeez. Maybe regular bullets are ok.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 13:47
|
|
|
Gyrojet rifles were a real thing, they didn't come from bond movies.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 13:53
|
|
|
VagueRant posted:Serious question: given how hard it is to categorise firearms (re: "assault weapons") - would it actually be feasible to do it on a gun-by-gun basis? Have some group vote on what is acceptable and what is not? Guns can be easily classified by rate of fire, capacity and size. Higher rate of fire means more bodies quicker, higher capacity means longer between reloads and a small gun is easier to conceal. Rate of fire is simple because all that matters is auto or semi-auto, size would probably be some overall length and capacity would be whatever number decided by legislature.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 13:54
|
|
|
VagueRant posted:Serious question: given how hard it is to categorise firearms (re: "assault weapons") - would it actually be feasible to do it on a gun-by-gun basis? Have some group vote on what is acceptable and what is not? Well, in a sense it can be relatively easy; firearms can be categorized by their action- how they chamber and fire bullets by cartridge-the kind of bullets that they fire and then after those two primary means into minutiae of barrel length and rifling and other less essential features. Under this technical set of definitions, for example, the US military defines an assault rifle as being a select-fire (it can fire single shots, and bursts or full-auto) rifle chambered in an intermediate (medium-sized) cartridge. In the sense of defining an "Assault weapon" things become murky because here you have a tautology- any weapon used to assault someone is an 'assault weapon' and multiple politicians have conjured up multiple definitions of varying technical and aesthetic features that often have no relation to how the firearm operates or its use in crime. For example, the well-known Desert Eagle is often defined as an 'assault weapon' by name (or due to its weight) and banned. The common 1911 design is not generally considered an assault weapon under most legislation. This is despite the fact that the Desert Eagle is about a foot long (there is a reason they always gave one to Arnie) weighs 4 pounds unloaded, costs about 2 grand, and was made for hunting big game. The 1911 on the other hand, was literally designed for the US army to go fight wars with. You can also turn a not-assault-weapon into an assault weapon by changing accessories, and not altering the fundamental features of the firearm.  In many states the synthetic stock (the part you hold and put up against your shoulder) and a larger magazine would classify the lower rifle as an 'assault weapon' even though they are functionally the same. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yATeti5GmI8 There is no combination of action and cartridge capable of taking North American game (deer, elk, boar, rabbit, squirrel) that is not also able to be used in taking a human's life.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 13:54
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Gyrojet rifles were a real thing, they didn't come from bond movies. Just looked it up. Neat
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 14:01
|
|
|
uuuunfff keep going im almost there
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 14:04
|
|
|
Grendels Dad posted:As history has shown, if everyone had a gun that shoots nukes no one would shoot their gun that shoots nukes. I'm pretty sure this theory wouldn't work if you brought it down to an individual level.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 14:08
|
|
|
LeJackal posted:You can also turn a not-assault-weapon into an assault weapon by changing accessories, and not altering the fundamental features of the firearm. The top one's function is to shoot [X] number of times before needing to reload. The bottom one's function is to shoot [Y] number of times before needing to reload. Technically they are merely functionally similar, not the same. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 14:09
|
|
|
Those magazines aren't fixed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 14:11
|
|
|
LeJackal posted:Well, in a sense it can be relatively easy; firearms can be categorized by their action- how they chamber and fire bullets by cartridge-the kind of bullets that they fire and then after those two primary means into minutiae of barrel length and rifling and other less essential features. These are all horrible ways to classify guns when you're worried about murders and spree killings.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 14:12
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:The top one's function is to shoot [X] number of times before needing to reload. I don't follow.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 14:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 02:23 |
|
|
katlington posted:These are all horrible ways to classify guns when you're worried about murders and spree killings. Maybe you should be thinking about how to classify murderers and spree killers and work from that angle, as no murder or spree killing happens without a person involved.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 14:15
|
|