Welcome to Gaia! ::

Wendigo's avatar

Manly Explorer

8,750 Points
  • Invisibility 100
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Super Tipsy 200
Why are you folks talking about bacon in the police state thread and police states in the handgun thread? Backwards.
Old Blue Collar Joe
God Emperor Akhenaton
Old Blue Collar Joe
God Emperor Akhenaton
Tadpole Jackson
God Emperor Akhenaton

Except that the 5.7 can pierce military body armor while pistol rounds cannot.


actually, i've got a tokarev pistol, fires 7.62x25. This caliber, out of a pistol, will penetrate class three soft body armor.
So can a +P .45, but it is nowhere near as good at it as the 5.7


That's a matter of personal opinion. I like the 5.7 in pistol variant, I can't stand a P90, as it is a POS weapon.
For that, I'll go with the 5.56 Wylde carbine frame in AR-15.

I don't see why it is a POS, but I can't see why you hate Glock either, so I'll drop it. Each round has its advantages and disadvantages, but if we look at AP, the 5.7 knock everything in the pistol realm out of the water.


The 5.7 is a good round in handgun. The P90 magazine design is two steps north of retarded.

Glock leg. There's a reason they named it after the firearm. It has a habit of doing that more than any other firearm.

With the P90, how is the magazine retarded? Is it because of a unique design or is it actually a flaw?

It's not the gun's fault that some dumb c**k decides to pull the gun out with the finger on the ******** trigger. Glocks are accurate, durable, easy to break down, easy to repair, rarely jams, has a low recoil (Assuming it isn't the .45 version), covers just about every round and it is cheap.
God Emperor Akhenaton
Old Blue Collar Joe
God Emperor Akhenaton
Old Blue Collar Joe
God Emperor Akhenaton
So can a +P .45, but it is nowhere near as good at it as the 5.7


That's a matter of personal opinion. I like the 5.7 in pistol variant, I can't stand a P90, as it is a POS weapon.
For that, I'll go with the 5.56 Wylde carbine frame in AR-15.

I don't see why it is a POS, but I can't see why you hate Glock either, so I'll drop it. Each round has its advantages and disadvantages, but if we look at AP, the 5.7 knock everything in the pistol realm out of the water.


The 5.7 is a good round in handgun. The P90 magazine design is two steps north of retarded.

Glock leg. There's a reason they named it after the firearm. It has a habit of doing that more than any other firearm.

With the P90, how is the magazine retarded? Is it because of a unique design or is it actually a flaw?

It's not the gun's fault that some dumb c**k decides to pull the gun out with the finger on the ******** trigger. Glocks are accurate, durable, easy to break down, easy to repair, rarely jams, has a low recoil (Assuming it isn't the .45 version), covers just about every round and it is cheap.


First. Glock leg isn't just caused by someone having their finger on the trigger. There's multiple cases of the firearm trigger being way too light in the pull and merely touching it sets it off. Far too few safeties for a firearm, which is idiotic in design at best.

The P90 is a design flaw. With an AR design, one can change the magazine and charge it without lowering the weapon, saving valuable seconds. The P90? Impossible. You lose valuable time reloading it, and reacquiring your target. It's poorly thought out and even more poorly executed.
While you have 50 rounds to engage, after those fifty rounds, you have a lot to do to get back on target.
Ban's avatar

Jeering Regular

Old Blue Collar Joe
And there is no way in hell that rifle is either a Garand or a BAR. Looks more like a .22 Marlin or Savage. It has a synthetic stock, and neither the Garand or BAR had such. And neither even bear a slight resemblance to what was posted.
My point was to give a couple of examples of semi-auto rifles, not to make a guess as to the model. Hence, my use of the word "like," indicating a comparison.

Tadpole Jackson
The PS90 is a civilianized version of the P90, which is a submachinegun.
Personal defense weapon, actually, which use rifle rounds.

Tadpole Jackson
I can get a carbine in .357 magnum, doesn't make it a rifle caliber.
And? Does this change the fact that 5.7 uses a small rifle primer, an aerodynamic spitzer bullet design, a bottlenecked cartridge, and every other marker of an intermediate rifle round?

Tadpole Jackson
It's a remmington semi auto rifle, yes. You don't seem to think it's an assault rifle, yet it's worlds more lethal than the AR-15 and operates the same way.
I could point out what are likely several distinctions in how it operates, including ease of magazine replacement, assuming it has a detachable box magazine, ammunition capacity, what I would guess is a very different mode of action on the semi-auto, presumably a piston action rather than direct impingement.

But, that's all kind of academic, since you don't seem to understand the definition of an assault rifle.

You were trying to convince me that a knife is just as lethal as an AR earlier. Now you're stating that this semi auto rifle is more lethal. It sounds like you're talking out of your a**, because you're missing the point of why you use an assault rifle type weapon versus a semi-auto rifle with an eight round magazine designed for hunting in a mass shooting.

Tadpole Jackson
as for the 5.45/5.56 argument, 5.45 was designed to follow the same ideal as 5.56, whether or not they are actually identical, they have the same design goal and use case.
No, the point was 5.45 would be lighter and produce less recoil than 5.56, and favor accuracy over power. Which is why they aren't as powerful, by any standard of ballistics measurement.
Less Than Liz's avatar

Profitable Prophet

7,700 Points
  • Brandisher 100
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Risky Lifestyle 100
Wendigo
Why are you folks talking about bacon in the police state thread and police states in the handgun thread? Backwards.

We're going to need our guns when they try to take our bacon away.
Less Than Liz's avatar

Profitable Prophet

7,700 Points
  • Brandisher 100
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Risky Lifestyle 100
Tadpole Jackson

User Image - Blocked by "Display Image" Settings. Click to show.

I was like, "Why are people posting pictures of lipstick in the gun thread?"
Ban
Old Blue Collar Joe
And there is no way in hell that rifle is either a Garand or a BAR. Looks more like a .22 Marlin or Savage. It has a synthetic stock, and neither the Garand or BAR had such. And neither even bear a slight resemblance to what was posted.
My point was to give a couple of examples of semi-auto rifles, not to make a guess as to the model. Hence, my use of the word "like," indicating a comparison.

Tadpole Jackson
The PS90 is a civilianized version of the P90, which is a submachinegun.
Personal defense weapon, actually, which use rifle rounds.

Tadpole Jackson
I can get a carbine in .357 magnum, doesn't make it a rifle caliber.
And? Does this change the fact that 5.7 uses a small rifle primer, an aerodynamic spitzer bullet design, a bottlenecked cartridge, and every other marker of an intermediate rifle round?

Tadpole Jackson
It's a remmington semi auto rifle, yes. You don't seem to think it's an assault rifle, yet it's worlds more lethal than the AR-15 and operates the same way.
I could point out what are likely several distinctions in how it operates, including ease of magazine replacement, assuming it has a detachable box magazine, ammunition capacity, what I would guess is a very different mode of action on the semi-auto, presumably a piston action rather than direct impingement.

But, that's all kind of academic, since you don't seem to understand the definition of an assault rifle.

You were trying to convince me that a knife is just as lethal as an AR earlier. Now you're stating that this semi auto rifle is more lethal. It sounds like you're talking out of your a**, because you're missing the point of why you use an assault rifle type weapon versus a semi-auto rifle with an eight round magazine designed for hunting in a mass shooting.

Tadpole Jackson
as for the 5.45/5.56 argument, 5.45 was designed to follow the same ideal as 5.56, whether or not they are actually identical, they have the same design goal and use case.
No, the point was 5.45 would be lighter and produce less recoil than 5.56, and favor accuracy over power. Which is why they aren't as powerful, by any standard of ballistics measurement.


you realize of course that there is literally nothing stopping you from having a 150 round drum on that remmington rifle right?

what is *assault* about the AR-15 that you can't get with say, a mini-14 or a that semi auto rifle there?

What is *your* definition of 'assault rifle' because mine involves select fire functionality.


oh, any on the subject of bottleneck, go look at 7.62x25 and .357SIG

as for 5.45 - 5.56

the Russians made 5.45 for the same reason Americans made 5.56.
Wendigo's avatar

Manly Explorer

8,750 Points
  • Invisibility 100
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Super Tipsy 200
Less Than Liz
Wendigo
Why are you folks talking about bacon in the police state thread and police states in the handgun thread? Backwards.

We're going to need our guns when they try to take our bacon away.
First they came for the bacon, and I didn't speak out, because I need to cut down on my fat and sodium anyway.

Then they came for the deviled eggs, and I didn't speak out, because those things take like all day to make, and do you even know how much cholesterol that is.

Then they came for the potato salad, and I didn't speak out, because seriously that's a lot of carbs and I'm trying to cut down.

Then they came for me, and I was like wait a minute I thought you were bringing the coke and chips, Dave, you had ONE JOB and you messed it up, this is why we never count on you for anything, Dave, I hope you're happy with yourself.
Ban's avatar

Jeering Regular

Tadpole Jackson
you realize of course that there is literally nothing stopping you from having a 150 round drum on that remmington rifle right?
No, I don't realize that, because I'm not actually sure of the model of this rifle, if it has a detachable or internal magazine, or if either the manufacturer or any specialty parts dealer actually makes such a highly impractical thing as a 150 round drum for a hunting rifle. I know Armatac makes a 150 round drum specifically for .223/5.56 ammo that'll fit on an M-16 and therefore an AR-15. But, y'know, I don't think such a product exists for this rifle.

Tadpole Jackson
what is *assault* about the AR-15 that you can't get with say, a mini-14 or a that semi auto rifle there?

What is *your* definition of 'assault rifle' because mine involves select fire functionality.
Assault rifles descend from the design elements of the StG 44, i.e., select fire, intermediate rifle cartridges, detachable magazine, et cetera. Of course, U.S. law also uses the term "assault weapon" to refer to other common design elements, like a barrel threaded for suppressor use, pistol grips, rail mounts, bayonet mounts, that sort of thing. My point about the lack of selective fire was that was the only thing that was really separating it from an assault rifle; hell, the original AR-15 was a ******** assault rifle that was re-designated as the M-16. It is designed to look and function like a modern assault rifle, with the sole exception of not having selective fire so it can be sold to a civilian market.

I'm not sure what you find difficult to understand.

Tadpole Jackson
oh, any on the subject of bottleneck, go look at 7.62x25 and .357SIG
I own a CZ-52. I already know what a 7.62x25 looks like. I notice it doesn't have either a spitzer bullet design nor a small rifle primer designed for higher pressure loads.

Tadpole Jackson
as for 5.45 - 5.56

the Russians made 5.45 for the same reason Americans made 5.56.
To kill communists?
Ban
Tadpole Jackson
you realize of course that there is literally nothing stopping you from having a 150 round drum on that remmington rifle right?
No, I don't realize that, because I'm not actually sure of the model of this rifle, if it has a detachable or internal magazine, or if either the manufacturer or any specialty parts dealer actually makes such a highly impractical thing as a 150 round drum for a hunting rifle. I know Armatac makes a 150 round drum specifically for .223/5.56 ammo that'll fit on an M-16 and therefore an AR-15. But, y'know, I don't think such a product exists for this rifle.

Tadpole Jackson
what is *assault* about the AR-15 that you can't get with say, a mini-14 or a that semi auto rifle there?

What is *your* definition of 'assault rifle' because mine involves select fire functionality.
Assault rifles descend from the design elements of the StG 44, i.e., select fire, intermediate rifle cartridges, detachable magazine, et cetera. Of course, U.S. law also uses the term "assault weapon" to refer to other common design elements, like a barrel threaded for suppressor use, pistol grips, rail mounts, bayonet mounts, that sort of thing. My point about the lack of selective fire was that was the only thing that was really separating it from an assault rifle; hell, the original AR-15 was a ******** assault rifle that was re-designated as the M-16. It is designed to look and function like a modern assault rifle, with the sole exception of not having selective fire so it can be sold to a civilian market.

I'm not sure what you find difficult to understand.

Tadpole Jackson
oh, any on the subject of bottleneck, go look at 7.62x25 and .357SIG
I own a CZ-52. I already know what a 7.62x25 looks like. I notice it doesn't have either a spitzer bullet design nor a small rifle primer designed for higher pressure loads.

Tadpole Jackson
as for 5.45 - 5.56

the Russians made 5.45 for the same reason Americans made 5.56.
To kill communists?


wait.

wait.

wait.

you're a gun owner who is *for* gun control?

We're done here.
Ban's avatar

Jeering Regular

Tadpole Jackson
you're a gun owner who is *for* gun control?

We're done here.
Yeah, I kind of already mentioned that I own a handgun, grew up with guns, et cetera. I also stated that I'm rather ambivalent to the notion of an absolute ban on civilian ownership. Like, a while ago. But, see, interestingly, I don't feel that fact requires me to have ridiculous policy positions like "You want to take my guns? Bring body armor."

Because I'm not ******** insane.
Ban

Because I'm not ******** insane.


I'm for personal liberties. I will not allow my rights to be infringed under any circumstances.

A bunch of guys a few hundred years ago felt the same way, now we have our own country because of it.

User Image - Blocked by "Display Image" Settings. Click to show.
Ban's avatar

Jeering Regular

Tadpole Jackson
I'm for personal liberties. I will not allow my rights to be infringed under any circumstances.

A bunch of guys a few hundred years ago felt the same way, now we have our own country because of it.
Oh, don't try and make yourself out to be some patriot in the spirit of the Founding Fathers. The reasons for the American Revolution were far more complex than mere gun ownership, and they certainly didn't threaten government officials merely over firearm regulation. The whole beef with gun ownership was really a matter of unequal treatment and discrimination on the basis of religion, derived out of the English Bill of Rights of 1689. The gun right was passed because James II, a Catholic, tried to discriminate against Protestants and their ability to carry arms. The attempt to disarm early Patriot militias was seen as a violation of the individual right to have "Arms for their Defence suitable to their Conditions and as allowed by Law." The use of force was frankly a last resort that many of the American Revolutionaries felt forced into because of a series of violations of their rights as Englishmen.

Your extremist position is a far cry from any of that, since you are basically invoking violent action as the first response to apparently any sort of regulation.
Ban
Tadpole Jackson
I'm for personal liberties. I will not allow my rights to be infringed under any circumstances.

A bunch of guys a few hundred years ago felt the same way, now we have our own country because of it.
Oh, don't try and make yourself out to be some patriot in the spirit of the Founding Fathers. The reasons for the American Revolution were far more complex than mere gun ownership, and they certainly didn't threaten government officials merely over firearm regulation. The whole beef with gun ownership was really a matter of unequal treatment and discrimination on the basis of religion, derived out of the English Bill of Rights of 1689. The gun right was passed because James II, a Catholic, tried to discriminate against Protestants and their ability to carry arms. The attempt to disarm early Patriot militias was seen as a violation of the individual right to have "Arms for their Defence suitable to their Conditions and as allowed by Law." The use of force was frankly a last resort that many of the American Revolutionaries felt forced into because of a series of violations of their rights as Englishmen.

Your extremist position is a far cry from any of that, since you are basically invoking violent action as the first response to apparently any sort of regulation.


no, I am proposing violence as a first resort to confiscation, because after confiscation, violence is impossible, and the government can act without fear of repercussions.

Under no circumstances will i ever voluntarily surrender my firearm, that is *why* the second amendment exists.
Wendigo
Let me get this straight.

About twenty elementary school children were just murdered, and the first thing that came to mind for you was "oh no, now they'll want my guns"?

Never mind that we have had horrific mass shootings this year in July, August, and three days ago. Which seems to warrant a look-see.

We bomb a lot of places by remote, surely we've killed more children than that by now. Nobody cares about that?

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games