|
|
Post by CadesCove on Apr 21, 2023 23:45:07 GMT
This is pretty brilliant and a must watch. 'Merica! It won't change any minds of the gun fetish crowd because fetishes don't think. youtu.be/LmJkxCpSKMY |
|
|
|
Post by CadesCove on Apr 21, 2023 23:53:24 GMT
Gives a nice recent recap on the popularity of the AR-15.
|
|
|
|
Post by atreyu on Apr 22, 2023 0:59:29 GMT
Insightful.
|
|
|
|
Post by CadesCove on Apr 22, 2023 1:17:17 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2023 7:42:54 GMT
There's nothing healthy about a whole country with civilians armed to the teeth, then again you people had this coming with your two-hundred-year-old fixation about guns. I am glad we don't have this problem here.
Your gun problem can't be resolved with half-assed measures that will only slightly affect gun fatalities. You don't cure cancer by targeting one cancer cell in a hundred.
|
|
petep
Legend
Posts: 23,255
|
Post by petep on Apr 22, 2023 10:36:08 GMT
There's nothing healthy about a whole country with civilians armed to the teeth, then again you people had this coming with your two-hundred-year-old fixation about guns. I am glad we don't have this problem here. Your gun problem can't be resolved with half-assed measures that will only slightly affect gun fatalities. You don't cure cancer by targeting one cancer cell in a hundred. We have a history of gaining our freedom thru the use of firearms and a civilian force. France has a more recent history of being taken over in record time. And then freed by forces from the uk and England We also have, unfortunately, a gang culture and proximity to high criminal places, cartels. This combined with many liberal courts and districts result in a revolving door high recidivism cycle. The data shows millions of self defense using guns where people save theirs and others lives from criminals who the democrats do no want to punish. We just have different histories. Some are protectors and some are sheep. That’s ok. Takes all types. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2023 11:38:40 GMT
There's nothing healthy about a whole country with civilians armed to the teeth, then again you people had this coming with your two-hundred-year-old fixation about guns. I am glad we don't have this problem here. Your gun problem can't be resolved with half-assed measures that will only slightly affect gun fatalities. You don't cure cancer by targeting one cancer cell in a hundred. We have a history of gaining our freedom thru the use of firearms and a civilian force. France has a more recent history of being taken over in record time. And then freed by forces from the uk and England We also have, unfortunately, a gang culture and proximity to high criminal places, cartels. This combined with many liberal courts and districts result in a revolving door high recidivism cycle. The data shows millions of self defense using guns where people save theirs and others lives from criminals who the democrats do no want to punish. We just have different histories. Some are protectors and some are sheep. That’s ok. Takes all types. You have a history of killing one another at record rates, you fucking asshole! You have a history of creating a shithole where the murder rate is SEVEN TIMES that of what it is in France and yet you're such a numbskull that that fact doesn't make you think in the least. You are a despicable twit and if one day you are murdered by someone, you'll have only yourself and your kind to blame, although you seem like you're ready to kick the bucket anytime. |
|
|
|
Post by limey² on Apr 22, 2023 11:53:35 GMT
There's nothing healthy about a whole country with civilians armed to the teeth, then again you people had this coming with your two-hundred-year-old fixation about guns. I am glad we don't have this problem here. Your gun problem can't be resolved with half-assed measures that will only slightly affect gun fatalities. You don't cure cancer by targeting one cancer cell in a hundred. We have a history of gaining our freedom thru the use of firearms and a civilian force. France has a more recent history of being taken over in record time. And then freed by forces from the uk and England We also have, unfortunately, a gang culture and proximity to high criminal places, cartels. This combined with many liberal courts and districts result in a revolving door high recidivism cycle. The data shows millions of self defense using guns where people save theirs and others lives from criminals who the democrats do no want to punish. We just have different histories. Some are protectors and some are sheep. That’s ok. Takes all types. Ironically, the semi-myth about armed civilians in your revolution masks the facts that fully-formed armies did the work. Without France the US revolution would certainly have failed. I hope you're not suggesting an armed French population would've hampered the German invasion in 1940; most men of fighting age were, in fact, fighting; most of them bravely & well, with excellent modern weapons. |
|
|
|
Post by CadesCove on Apr 22, 2023 12:42:20 GMT
There's nothing healthy about a whole country with civilians armed to the teeth, then again you people had this coming with your two-hundred-year-old fixation about guns. I am glad we don't have this problem here. Your gun problem can't be resolved with half-assed measures that will only slightly affect gun fatalities. You don't cure cancer by targeting one cancer cell in a hundred. We have a history of gaining our freedom thru the use of firearms and a civilian force. France has a more recent history of being taken over in record time. And then freed by forces from the uk and England We also have, unfortunately, a gang culture and proximity to high criminal places, cartels. This combined with many liberal courts and districts result in a revolving door high recidivism cycle. The data shows millions of self defense using guns where people save theirs and others lives from criminals who the democrats do no want to punish. We just have different histories. Some are protectors and some are sheep. That’s ok. Takes all types. And PeeTape completely ignores the video and pitifully deflects. |
|
|
|
Post by archie on Apr 22, 2023 12:55:11 GMT
We have a history of gaining our freedom thru the use of firearms and a civilian force. France has a more recent history of being taken over in record time. And then freed by forces from the uk and England We also have, unfortunately, a gang culture and proximity to high criminal places, cartels. This combined with many liberal courts and districts result in a revolving door high recidivism cycle. The data shows millions of self defense using guns where people save theirs and others lives from criminals who the democrats do no want to punish. We just have different histories. Some are protectors and some are sheep. That’s ok. Takes all types. You have a history of killing one another at record rates, you fucking asshole! You have a history of creating a shithole where the murder rate is SEVEN TIMES that of what it is in France and yet you're such a numbskull that that fact doesn't make you think in the least. You are a despicable twit and if one day you are murdered by someone, you'll have only yourself and your kind to blame, although you seem like you're ready to kick the bucket anytime. Good morning dirty mouth. You are tight. I wonder why. The population of France is ~68.3 million people (269.0 million more people live in United States). |
|
sokpupet
Legend
Go Dark Brandon!
Posts: 5,170
|
Post by sokpupet on Apr 22, 2023 13:05:16 GMT
Klepper doesn’t have to search for his material; that’s for sure!
|
|
|
|
Post by thecitizen on Apr 22, 2023 13:18:28 GMT
There's nothing healthy about a whole country with civilians armed to the teeth, then again you people had this coming with your two-hundred-year-old fixation about guns. I am glad we don't have this problem here. Your gun problem can't be resolved with half-assed measures that will only slightly affect gun fatalities. You don't cure cancer by targeting one cancer cell in a hundred. We have a history of gaining our freedom thru the use of firearms and a civilian force. France has a more recent history of being taken over in record time. And then freed by forces from the uk and England We also have, unfortunately, a gang culture and proximity to high criminal places, cartels. This combined with many liberal courts and districts result in a revolving door high recidivism cycle. The data shows millions of self defense using guns where people save theirs and others lives from criminals who the democrats do no want to punish. We just have different histories. Some are protectors and some are sheep. That’s ok. Takes all types. All done by armed forces dumbass |
|
petep
Legend
Posts: 23,255
|
Post by petep on Apr 22, 2023 13:20:38 GMT
We have a history of gaining our freedom thru the use of firearms and a civilian force. France has a more recent history of being taken over in record time. And then freed by forces from the uk and England We also have, unfortunately, a gang culture and proximity to high criminal places, cartels. This combined with many liberal courts and districts result in a revolving door high recidivism cycle. The data shows millions of self defense using guns where people save theirs and others lives from criminals who the democrats do no want to punish. We just have different histories. Some are protectors and some are sheep. That’s ok. Takes all types. Ironically, the semi-myth about armed civilians in your revolution masks the facts that fully-formed armies did the work. Without France the US revolution would certainly have failed. I hope you're not suggesting an armed French population would've hampered the German invasion in 1940; most men of fighting age were, in fact, fighting; most of them bravely & well, with excellent modern weapons. I have to disagree on your first sentence. If you read our history, the civilian militias were formed long before the standing army. And most all of the people in the standing army in the revolutionary war came out of the civilian militia. And of course those militia who did not join the standing army stayed in the civilian militia. A significant reason the standing army was good was because they had good raw material coming out of the militia. It’s also fair to state that yes, of course the militia member who joined the formal standing army were at the lead in winning the war, there were a number of very important and critical battles that were won by the civilian militia. A good overview here. www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/militia-minutemen-and-continentals-american-military-force-american-revolutionAnd of course the French were critical. Especially at the end. But they also supplied critical inputs like gunpowder. When you look at statistics and metrics used in wars like round expended per kill in major wars the us rounds expended per kill is vastly lower than other nations. Why? Well many in our fighting force grew up shooting. Even today, I’ve hog hunted often - much different from deer hunting as there are no limits and it’s a good test of shooting skills, distance and moving targets- with police officers and career military guys - any of the country hunters blow away the city police and military guys who grew up in the city when it comes to marksmanship. Most of the city police and even military guys don’t get the shooting experience a lifelong hunter has. Qualifying once a year on a 25 yard pistol range is not the same as spending decades hunting and thousands of hours on the range and trap shooting. My dad went to a military college and was in the military after and shared quite a few funny stories of trying to train the city guys. He and others had been hunting and shooting since they were young kids. Almost none of the city kids had ever shot a gun let alone learn to stalk. Watch experienced hunters / shooters and they shoot with both eyes open when not using a gun with a scope, they don’t blink when the gun fires and they don’t flinch at all. That’s not to suggest that the military doesn’t have great marksmen. I’ve been to the camp Perry long range competition and I can barely see the target they routinely hit with iron sights at 1000 yards. Often it’s a military winner. And of course the organization and strategy an organized military offers is very important vs an unorganized group. But again, these military members were us civilians first. |
|
|
|
Post by limey² on Apr 22, 2023 14:28:09 GMT
Ironically, the semi-myth about armed civilians in your revolution masks the facts that fully-formed armies did the work. Without France the US revolution would certainly have failed. I hope you're not suggesting an armed French population would've hampered the German invasion in 1940; most men of fighting age were, in fact, fighting; most of them bravely & well, with excellent modern weapons. I have to disagree on your first sentence. If you read our history, the civilian militias were formed long before the standing army. And most all of the people in the standing army in the revolutionary war came out of the civilian militia. And of course those militia who did not join the standing army stayed in the civilian militia. A significant reason the standing army was good was because they had good raw material coming out of the militia. It’s also fair to state that yes, of course the militia member who joined the formal standing army were at the lead in winning the war, there were a number of very important and critical battles that were won by the civilian militia. A good overview here. www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/militia-minutemen-and-continentals-american-military-force-american-revolutionAnd of course the French were critical. Especially at the end. But they also supplied critical inputs like gunpowder. When you look at statistics and metrics used in wars like round expended per kill in major wars the us rounds expended per kill is vastly lower than other nations. Why? Well many in our fighting force grew up shooting. Even today, I’ve hog hunted often - much different from deer hunting as there are no limits and it’s a good test of shooting skills, distance and moving targets- with police officers and career military guys - any of the country hunters blow away the city police and military guys who grew up in the city when it comes to marksmanship. Most of the city police and even military guys don’t get the shooting experience a lifelong hunter has. Qualifying once a year on a 25 yard pistol range is not the same as spending decades hunting and thousands of hours on the range and trap shooting. My dad went to a military college and was in the military after and shared quite a few funny stories of trying to train the city guys. He and others had been hunting and shooting since they were young kids. Almost none of the city kids had ever shot a gun let alone learn to stalk. Watch experienced hunters / shooters and they shoot with both eyes open when not using a gun with a scope, they don’t blink when the gun fires and they don’t flinch at all. That’s not to suggest that the military doesn’t have great marksmen. I’ve been to the camp Perry long range competition and I can barely see the target they routinely hit with iron sights at 1000 yards. Often it’s a military winner. And of course the organization and strategy an organized military offers is very important vs an unorganized group. But again, these military members were us civilians first. You drift from the point. All military members were civilians first, and frankly, as a former small-arms and marksmanship instructor in our Army, those who came in thinkinng they could shoot were a pain in the arse. Civilian target/hunting shooting is largely irrelevant to combat applications of fire. The revolution probably wouldn't have happened at all without the French, and had it happened when the British weren't engaged in a world war, it would've been wrapped up very quickly indeed. Range skills for American soldiers are entirely comparable, at the infantry sub-unit level, to those of British infantry. Other NATO nations I can't comment on, not seen. I'm aware there's a story every nation tells itself about itself, and part of yours includes the rugged self-reliant shooting man who defeated the British. Possibly in the 18th Century that base skill set of shooting would have been tangentially useful to a war effort. Infantry tactics in battle back then favoured those who could load and fire the most musket shots in the least time. It was like ships' broadsides. No suppressing fire, no indieect fire, very limited use for marksmanship. No fire and manoeuvre, no support weapons other than cannon (and, as your National Anthem references, Congreve rockets!) A recruit could be trained and practised to follow simple drill commands and fire at the required rate regardless of his previous experience. I'd be very dubious indeed about the claims of kills-per-round. This century and last, especially WW1 & 2, the huge majority of combat deaths were from artillery, machine guns, mortars, rifles. In that order, and with the first three making up perhaps 75%. Slightly different in the early stages of WW1 and in some theatres, such as West Africa WW1 and jungle fighting (Burma, some Pacific islands) in WW2. |
|
petep
Legend
Posts: 23,255
|
Post by petep on Apr 22, 2023 14:49:20 GMT
I have to disagree on your first sentence. If you read our history, the civilian militias were formed long before the standing army. And most all of the people in the standing army in the revolutionary war came out of the civilian militia. And of course those militia who did not join the standing army stayed in the civilian militia. A significant reason the standing army was good was because they had good raw material coming out of the militia. It’s also fair to state that yes, of course the militia member who joined the formal standing army were at the lead in winning the war, there were a number of very important and critical battles that were won by the civilian militia. A good overview here. www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/militia-minutemen-and-continentals-american-military-force-american-revolutionAnd of course the French were critical. Especially at the end. But they also supplied critical inputs like gunpowder. When you look at statistics and metrics used in wars like round expended per kill in major wars the us rounds expended per kill is vastly lower than other nations. Why? Well many in our fighting force grew up shooting. Even today, I’ve hog hunted often - much different from deer hunting as there are no limits and it’s a good test of shooting skills, distance and moving targets- with police officers and career military guys - any of the country hunters blow away the city police and military guys who grew up in the city when it comes to marksmanship. Most of the city police and even military guys don’t get the shooting experience a lifelong hunter has. Qualifying once a year on a 25 yard pistol range is not the same as spending decades hunting and thousands of hours on the range and trap shooting. My dad went to a military college and was in the military after and shared quite a few funny stories of trying to train the city guys. He and others had been hunting and shooting since they were young kids. Almost none of the city kids had ever shot a gun let alone learn to stalk. Watch experienced hunters / shooters and they shoot with both eyes open when not using a gun with a scope, they don’t blink when the gun fires and they don’t flinch at all. That’s not to suggest that the military doesn’t have great marksmen. I’ve been to the camp Perry long range competition and I can barely see the target they routinely hit with iron sights at 1000 yards. Often it’s a military winner. And of course the organization and strategy an organized military offers is very important vs an unorganized group. But again, these military members were us civilians first. You drift from the point. All military members were civilians first, and frankly, as a former small-arms and marksmanship instructor in our Army, those who came in thinkinng they could shoot were a pain in the arse. Civilian target/hunting shooting is largely irrelevant to combat applications of fire. The revolution probably wouldn't have happened at all without the French, and had it happened when the British weren't engaged in a world war, it would've been wrapped up very quickly indeed. Range skills for American soldiers are entirely comparable, at the infantry sub-unit level, to those of British infantry. Other NATO nations I can't comment on, not seen. I'm aware there's a story every nation tells itself about itself, and part of yours includes the rugged self-reliant shooting man who defeated the British. Possibly in the 18th Century that base skill set of shooting would have been tangentially useful to a war effort. Infantry tactics in battle back then favoured those who could load and fire the most musket shots in the least time. It was like ships' broadsides. No suppressing fire, no indieect fire, very limited use for marksmanship. No fire and manoeuvre, no support weapons other than cannon (and, as your National Anthem references, Congreve rockets!) A recruit could be trained and practised to follow simple drill commands and fire at the required rate regardless of his previous experience. I'd be very dubious indeed about the claims of kills-per-round. This century and last, especially WW1 & 2, the huge majority of combat deaths were from artillery, machine guns, mortars, rifles. In that order, and with the first three making up perhaps 75%. Slightly different in the early stages of WW1 and in some theatres, such as West Africa WW1 and jungle fighting (Burma, some Pacific islands) in WW2. This is a good read on infantry tactics from the revolutionary war to more current tactics. www.thriftbooks.com/w/on-infantry-revised-edition-military-profession_john-a-english/1359739/So much depends on practice time. I had dinner and drinks one evening in brugges with a guy training jet fighter pilots open water survival. It was a month long nato exercise in the North Sea. He was Belgian. I’m obviously us. He shared that watching the us pilots against the others in combat exercises was like watching a pro football (soccer) team against kids. He was sharing flight hours per month and the us pilots were up daily, while some others might get up once per month. They say the sas is the most highly trained special forces team. I was spent a weekend with Eric Haney one of the first members of delta force and even in his book he references getting trained by the sas. They are all trained to shoot pistols like a shotgun, looking at your target not thru the sights. It’s hard to do. Anyway, if I had to put together an army in the 18th century I’d like to have people coming in with shooting skills. It’s certainly not a detriment. |
|
|
|
Post by rabbitreborn on Apr 22, 2023 15:15:10 GMT
There's nothing healthy about a whole country with civilians armed to the teeth, then again you people had this coming with your two-hundred-year-old fixation about guns. I am glad we don't have this problem here. Your gun problem can't be resolved with half-assed measures that will only slightly affect gun fatalities. You don't cure cancer by targeting one cancer cell in a hundred. Tell us all how it needs to be solved. How do you disarm tens of millions of well armed people who don’t want to be disarmed? Military? |
|
|
|
Post by Monster Man on Apr 22, 2023 15:41:20 GMT
Honestly, the video isn't that bad when it comes to the interviews of the folks at the gun show.
Ryan Busse has no idea of what he is talking about though. I have been going to gun shows for decades. The AR-15 had been around and popular since before the Assault Weapons ban of 1994. The 1994 AWB specifically targeted the common features found on them.
You could find them and all sorts of tactical gear at gun shows before Busse claims.
And if you want to blame anyone for their explosion in sales, blame the Democrats for constantly threatening to not only bring back the AWB, but to bring it back worse targeting the functionality of the weapons, not just their features. Every time they bring up their fear-mongering threats, sales go through the roof.
This is just the AR-15, you start looking at other assault rifles like the SKS, people were buying those things and stock piling ammo even before the AWB.
The defining moments for a lot of folks were Ruby Ridge and Waco. When they seen how vindictively the government was going to go after folks, people started buying more guns and ammo. Then they passed the first round of the AWB, folks seen that not only would the government vindictively go after folks, they were trying to disarm them too... gee, guess what happens, folks buy more.
|
|
Fiddler
Legend
Wasted again ..
Posts: 13,802
|
Post by Fiddler on Apr 22, 2023 15:55:42 GMT
There's nothing healthy about a whole country with civilians armed to the teeth, then again you people had this coming with your two-hundred-year-old fixation about guns. I am glad we don't have this problem here. Your gun problem can't be resolved with half-assed measures that will only slightly affect gun fatalities. You don't cure cancer by targeting one cancer cell in a hundred. Some are protectors and some are sheep. And you are delusional ..
You nitwits actually think you're gonna take on the military .. Yep .. Fucking delusional ..
|
|
|
|
Post by Monster Man on Apr 22, 2023 15:56:48 GMT
We have a history of gaining our freedom thru the use of firearms and a civilian force. France has a more recent history of being taken over in record time. And then freed by forces from the uk and England We also have, unfortunately, a gang culture and proximity to high criminal places, cartels. This combined with many liberal courts and districts result in a revolving door high recidivism cycle. The data shows millions of self defense using guns where people save theirs and others lives from criminals who the democrats do no want to punish. We just have different histories. Some are protectors and some are sheep. That’s ok. Takes all types. Ironically, the semi-myth about armed civilians in your revolution masks the facts that fully-formed armies did the work. Without France the US revolution would certainly have failed. I hope you're not suggesting an armed French population would've hampered the German invasion in 1940; most men of fighting age were, in fact, fighting; most of them bravely & well, with excellent modern weapons. An armed French population did hamper the German invasion. It was called The French Resistance. Imagine if they had been more well armed before instead of having to scrounge for and fight for and improvise for the weapons they had to. |
|
Fiddler
Legend
Wasted again ..
Posts: 13,802
|
Post by Fiddler on Apr 22, 2023 15:58:37 GMT
The defining moments for a lot of folks were Ruby Ridge and Waco. When they seen how vindictively the government was going to go after folks, people started buying more guns and ammo. Then they passed the first round of the AWB, folks seen that not only would the government vindictively go after folks, they were trying to disarm them too... gee, guess what happens, folks buy more. An excerpt from MM's upcoming book.. "A Brief History of Gunfucking" |
|
