Nah man, it's totally normal to go on weekly bro rage fests calling people toolbag (2x), moron (2x), bigot, idiot, shithead due to political disagreements.
HS Shooting in MD, LEO Responds in 1 Minute
- Thread starter Knight_Light
- Start date
Nah man, it's totally normal to go on weekly bro rage fests calling people toolbag (2x), moron (2x), bigot, idiot, shithead due to political disagreements.
I may be wrong, but hasn't he threatened people on here before? It's been a while since I've been this active, but I swear there have been times I could see the veins in his forehead through my computer screen.
C'mon man. He pointed out twice very clearly what he was saying, nothing more. Can you read?
He has told people to "seriously die in a fire"
But yeah I'm the one that needs mental health.
Dude, you're on record lying, with irrefutable proof, and you refuse to even look at your own words or BT's words to admit this.
I don't know what else to call that, but totally delusional.
Of course he can read. He reads something, then his demented mind twists it to mean what it wants.
Wrong.
Still avoiding my question. What were you trying to prove? Do you honestly wish the asshole doing the shooting had an AR instead of a 9mm? I'll keep asking.
How am I wrong?
BT said NOTHING regarding 9mm being deadlier than 5.56mm. Nothing. There are actual words to prove this. You know, things people type.
And LOL at you being triggered by calling you delusional. When people see things that aren't there, what else should i say?
lmao every look here: 85 is still avoiding the question because he knows he got called out pulling his usual partisan bullshit. I'll bust out the crayons for you: the entire basis of this argument was you saying it was irrelevant which round was used. BT (for whatever reason) has decided to support you (boldmovecotton.jpg). I said Poolside was right, it is a good thing he didn't have an AR. Both you and bt seem to think things would have went better if he had an AR. Why? Also why are you dodging this question so hard?
2nd update for even more name calling.
Anyone else remember BT immediately calling out chemmie for saying one "moron"? Pepperidge farm remembers.
Yawn. Just like your absolute insane comment about Bob wanting to "round up and exterminate Muslims", you're completely deflecting away from your serial lying here. You've got problems man.
Here- I'll answer your totally stupid, irrelevant question. I don't really care what this shooter had. He could have targeted more than 2 kids with a handgun just the same as he could have with an AR. The fact of this entire story is that thanks for the speed of the LEO responding, the shooter only actually hit 2 kids. That fact has absolutely nothing to do with the weapon type. Nothing.
First off all, thank you for managing to avoid using personal insults, this is a big step for you.
Second, thank you for finally answering the question. You are still wrong of course, because as I very clearly stated in my very first post (before you totally bro raged) the type of gun very much does matter, because if he had shot them with an AR they most likely would be dead. I'm not talking about number targeted or reloading or anything like that, just the terminal ballistics of the cartridge used. Poolside was correct in being thankful this guy didn't use an AR, and we are extremely grateful for the quick reactions of the Resource officer that bravely returned fire.
Look bob, everyone here knows you aren't the brightest crayon in the box (no offense meant, just an observation) and you usually make up for that in life and on here with effort, so that is why I took the time to underline the applicable parts. You tried, you failed, I'm sure you are used to it by now.
I can "target" more than 2 people with a gun made only of my fingers and yell "Pew Pew!". Targeting and hitting/inflicting injury/killing are different. You do know that right?
I will admit neither of them said it would be better. 85 said it was irrelevant, which is still 100% wrong and I don't see you jumping on his case. I'm not sure even BT knows what he is trying to argue at this point, other than blindly support 85, guess he likes to live dangerously.
You obviously know absolute zero about handguns or guns in general . You could walk through that high school hallway and have unlimited targets with a 9 mm . It kills absolute dead at a further distance than you imagine judging from your statement
You’ve offered pretty much nothing of relevance this entire thread but I’ll respond to this totally irrelevant point.
The topic here was never the lethality of the round used- it was the SPEED OF THE RESPONSE. Instead of 10 kids hit we had 2. The LEO put the shooter down in less than a minute.
It also totally misses the point that a 9mm absolutely will kill most people from close range. You guys are hilariously acting like a 9mm round is similar to a B.B.
Except for where you ignorantly stated that the gun used was "irrelevant". So yeah, you are wrong.
Except thankfully for the two kids that were shot by this nutjob. Also FBI stats say you are wrong, the majority of people shot by 9mm survive. Glad you are wrong here yet again
Where did anyone say this? FNB I'm sure you will be right on this case here calling 85 a liar.
So I guess we can stop requiring back ground checks and 3 day waiting periods for the 9 mm since it won’t kill anyone right ?
Did you pass grammar? Saying people are acting a certain way =/= Saying they said something.
Example: "Ninja acts like he thinks he knows everything" is not the same as saying "Ninja said he thinks he knows everything".
He's delusional dude. Mentally unstable. You can't even have a friendly debate with him since he lies about things that weren't even said.
I really hope you guys are just pretending to be this stupid. It's a bold debate strategy, to be sure.
Ummm ... there's always a couple of people complaining about a law enforcement officer, let alone a law abiding citizen, who shoots and kills a criminal in every shooting.
I was a second hand party to one once, and someone -- who literally had their lives saved by the law abiding citizen -- couldn't stop complaining about the law abiding citizen being armed. This was in Virginia, which has open carry, and I was utterly dumbfounded that the survivor was bitching about the concealed carry holder who saved their life. I finally stopped and said, "Are you serious? Or just still in shock?" They were dead serious, and was still complaining over the following weeks. I was surprised how many people in the office agreed with them too.
And many articles have people who say, "The cops didn't have to kill him. They could have just shot him in the leg." I literally have to go facepalm.
Holy s*** are you still so goddamn stupid that you think pistols are deadlier then rifle rounds within your made up arbitrary 10m limit?
Look, I get that you are trying your hardest here, I understand you are still super butt hurt from me embarrassing you. But if you just post random completely wrong bullshit with zero sources or basis in reality, everyone sees right thru it.
Lmao you aren't even trying now. We already went over how you obviously can't rely on your wits, you gotta give 110% to even have a chance of not completely embarrassing yourself on here.
Okay, let's step back ...
First off, the .223/5.56 is inhumane as a rifle round ... at any range. Let's get that there first and foremost. ER nurses and doctors will point that out.
Secondly, and on the same point, the US military, just like hunters, have long known the .223/5.56 is combat ineffective for killing (or incapacitating) human sized targets, like deer. Even the Iraqi's accused the USMC of "execution style head shots" until they statistically proved that unless one hit's the "T", a target is not going down.
And it's only gotten worse ...
into a SBR as a standard issue where the energy drops towards 1KJ from it's original 2KJ design in a 45mm case that requires at least 500mm/20" of barrel.
I.e., the .223/5.56 has long been combat ineffective at any range, much less in a SBR. The M16 was originally an USAF survival/base defense-suppression platform that was only supposed to be an interim adoption by the US Army as M14 issues showed up in Vietnam.
Just moving up to as little as .24/6mm, and +50% weight, radically changes the effectiveness of the platform to kill. Unfortunately the sub-12m bolt-head of the AR-15 rotating bolt design severely limits options. Which is where things like the 7.62 AAC BLK and 6.8 SPC have come from.
Again, had you mentioned those two (2), I would have not given you flak. But since you didn't.
I.e., the .223/5.56 has long been combat ineffective at any range, much less in a SBR. The M16 was originally an USAF survival/base defense-suppression platform that was only supposed to be an interim adoption by the US Army as M14 issues showed up in Vietnam.
Just moving up to as little as .24/6mm, and +50% weight, radically changes the effectiveness of the platform to kill. Unfortunately the sub-12m bolt-head of the AR-15 rotating bolt design severely limits options. Which is where things like the 7.62 AAC BLK and 6.8 SPC have come from.
Again, had you mentioned those two (2), I would have not given you flak. But since you didn't.
Secondly, within 10m, pistol caliber rounds still have half the energy of the lowest of rifle rounds, like the .223/5.56. At the same time, there is 3-4x the front cros-section area. The FBI studied this extensively in the late '70s and early '80s.
This includes debunking the myth that pistol rounds don't over-penetrate ... they can ... and do!
Even before the infamous shootout, the precursor to the HRT was already involved with both Delta Force and local SWAT teams. The FBI perfected their gel around testing many rifle rounds, including the (at the time to non-military) .223/5.56.
They reached the same conclusion as the US military had ... it was ineffective at close range, and poor for CQC.
It also helped the SAS made the MP5 famous, which caused the FBI to look at 9mm. Their initial results with the 9mm were also poor. Let me say that again ... 9mm was also poor. It's the reason why the FBI skipped the 9mm, and adopted the 10mm back in the 80s.
They eventually scaled back to the .40 S&W design, which is yet another conversation. But that was the '80s.
They reached the same conclusion as the US military had ... it was ineffective at close range, and poor for CQC.
It also helped the SAS made the MP5 famous, which caused the FBI to look at 9mm. Their initial results with the 9mm were also poor. Let me say that again ... 9mm was also poor. It's the reason why the FBI skipped the 9mm, and adopted the 10mm back in the 80s.
They eventually scaled back to the .40 S&W design, which is yet another conversation. But that was the '80s.
The FBI now considers the 9mm just as effective as the .40/10mm in terminal effectiveness to kill (or incapacitate). The key is always to hit a vital organ, but the common +P pressures that every 9mm accepts these days, along with the bullet designs, are creating cavities that are vastly improved over the 9mm just a couple of decades back, on-par with .40/10mm, let alone well beyond the .45 ACP (that has been very, very stagnant)!
There is even a sub-munition 4mm design for 9x19 that can penetrate steel plate better than a .223/5.56 at short range!
Now, that all said ...
Because of the deployment of .223/5.56 into urban combat in the 21st century, it is also getting the same level of research and innovation. But because 9mm has had 3x the time in such innovation, the .223/5.56 has long been lagging, because it's only been on-going for a decade, not 3 decades.
Furthermore, most of the research for the AR-15 ...
is not in .223/5.56, but larger calibers, like 6-7.62mm. So it's very unlikely the .223/5.56 will ever get as much focus. That's why .223/5.56 is not recommended for home defense. It will never be 'well developed' for CQC.
Although the FBI has started to test and recommend some SP and HP rounds in the .223/5.56 platforms if one "must" use one, especially in a SBR. That's because the AR-15 platform is so ingrained in SWAT and other units for body armor wearing criminals.
Although the FBI has started to test and recommend some SP and HP rounds in the .223/5.56 platforms if one "must" use one, especially in a SBR. That's because the AR-15 platform is so ingrained in SWAT and other units for body armor wearing criminals.
Last edited:
JFC that's a long ass way of saying I'm right. Try again BS, it only takes one sentence to say you were misinformed, and I am correct.
You do know he's trying to argue against what you said, right?
You do know he's trying to argue against what you said, right?
Latest posts
-
***UCF making a push for transfer committed elsewhere***- Latest: HoopingKnight51
-
