You are the dumbest mother****er I’ve ever encountered in any medium , internet , telephone , real life whatever . Even if your trolling it doesn’t make you any less annoying . You ruin every attempt at reasonable debate or conversation
HS Shooting in MD, LEO Responds in 1 Minute
- Thread starter Knight_Light
- Start date
Where's BT the personal attack police? Oh wait he's the hypocrite dealing in pathetic personal attacks lmao
And it only take one sentence to admit you didn't realize the context I was speaking of ... at under 10m, like a classroom. You kept mouthing off about pistol against rifle, without even hinting you saw that.
Of course a pistol caliber sucks at range. It's inaccurate, loses energy fast, has a massive cross-section for its profile that introduces drift, is traveling slower so there's more drop, etc...
But that's not what we're talking about. What we're talking about is the ability of the bullet to hit a vital organ! Or create a cavity or other area good enough to cause fast bleeding out.
Which brings us back to modern, defensive, civilian 9mm cartridges, loads and bullets ... versus common, civilian .223/5.56 cartridges, loads and bullets ... within 10m.
That said ... even I admitted the FBI has recently gone to great lengths to recommend SWAT and their own HRT loads for .223/5.56 in CQC. The FBI is doing more and more research and testing, just like they did for pistol rounds. Why? Because a lot of teams carry an AR-15 and only have a .223/5.56 bolt/barrel. But it's 25 years behind, and has barely a decade of such.
They don't have a lot of options and budget like operators do in the military, who don't have to deal with the inadequacies of the .223/5.56 by replacing it in their AR-15 compatible platform.
Doubling down on stupidity. Bold choice. You are still wrong, post a study that supports your case or stfu.
And 85 I haven't forgot about your stupidity of "most people shot with a handgun at close ranges die". Lol fuking nonsense. You know this is the internet, you can't just make up bullshit and think people buy it
And 85 I haven't forgot about your stupidity of "most people shot with a handgun at close ranges die". Lol fuking nonsense. You know this is the internet, you can't just make up bullshit and think people buy it
I'm not the one making asinine statements like pistols are better at stopping ppl than rifles inside an arbitrary length. The burden of proof lies on you. Stop deflecting.
Just FYI @btbones, @Bob the Knight, where Ninja is screwing up is that he thinks I'm talking about 'wounding.'
In that regard, even the .223/5.56mm kicks pistol caliber butt -- even in a SBR -- and far, far worse with anything bigger and more energy. Anything of 1K+, let alone 2K or 3K, is going to best anything <1K. And on the battlefield, away from well-equipped first responders and proper medical facilities, a 'wound' that lasts hours can be terminal -- unlike in a typical, American city.
But we're not talking wounding here. We're talking killing (or incapacitating). That's why the FBI's own statistics on mass shootings are very different than simple energy. The .223/5.56 have been poor at killing per round discharge than pistols, in the confines of a room (10m).
That said ... again, the FBI has started to bring its extensive knowledge and testing to .223/5.56, even as military special forces use alternative calibers and even wholesale cartridge changes -- ones that require a new bolt, not just a new barrel. Just like the FBI did with 10mm, and then 9mm.
In that regard, even the .223/5.56mm kicks pistol caliber butt -- even in a SBR -- and far, far worse with anything bigger and more energy. Anything of 1K+, let alone 2K or 3K, is going to best anything <1K. And on the battlefield, away from well-equipped first responders and proper medical facilities, a 'wound' that lasts hours can be terminal -- unlike in a typical, American city.
But we're not talking wounding here. We're talking killing (or incapacitating). That's why the FBI's own statistics on mass shootings are very different than simple energy. The .223/5.56 have been poor at killing per round discharge than pistols, in the confines of a room (10m).
That said ... again, the FBI has started to bring its extensive knowledge and testing to .223/5.56, even as military special forces use alternative calibers and even wholesale cartridge changes -- ones that require a new bolt, not just a new barrel. Just like the FBI did with 10mm, and then 9mm.
Okay, explain me this ...
How did the Columbine shooters get nearly a 1:1 (dead:wounded) using 9mm in a 'spray'n pray' SMG-like? Why didn't the Aurora and other shooters, that chose the .223/5.56, get more 1:4 to 1:6? Plus all those that got jams due to using drum and other, >>20 capacity options?
The Parkland shooter was very accurate and well trained, and got closer to 1:1, using 10 capacity magazines. Although even he still took multiple bullets to do so. The worst was the CT shooting. They left him alone, and he had to pump multiple rounds ... into little kids. He had the free time to do so.
No one talks about this. They talk about wounding and other things, not the actual ability to kill or at least, immediately, incapacitate. The .223/5.56 is a particularly inhumane rifle cartridge, especially in a SBR. A larger cartridge is warranted, and in close range, even a larger caliber pistol, especially with bullets of a newer design, kill far more often per shot.
At least until the .223/5.56 options and related knowledge greatly improves. Although I suspect it never will with 6-7.62mm options that remove its primary issues, as operators have long deployed.
Backpedaling I see. You got a little ways to go to get it right, but eventually you'll get there.
Come again? Where did I backpedal?
Don't confuse backpedaling with me trying to figure out just how you could think I'm wrong? Again ...
Details! Details! Details! Context! Context! Context!
It took you a half-dozen posts before you even recognized I was talking within 10m. And then, you applied your generic 'energy' requirement.
I never said the .223/5.56 doesn't wound the best. Of course rifles, and anything with energy, wounds the best. And that's been the problem with the .223/5.56 as well.
It does not kill well. If you're in the military, you should know this. If you're in the Marines, you definitely know the T shot!
Cool, im not arguing that it kills well. It does kill a hell of a lot better than any pistol round at any distance.
I'm just assuming by your absolute refusal to post these "FBI studies" you keep referencing (probably because they don't exist) that you realize you have dug a whole you can't get out of.
Also just a heads up, the fact that 85, BT or FNB aren't chiming in is a pretty good heads up that you are straight nuts. You are obviously way out in left field if even they won't try to help your case.
I'm just assuming by your absolute refusal to post these "FBI studies" you keep referencing (probably because they don't exist) that you realize you have dug a whole you can't get out of.
Also just a heads up, the fact that 85, BT or FNB aren't chiming in is a pretty good heads up that you are straight nuts. You are obviously way out in left field if even they won't try to help your case.
I didn't think I needed to state the obvious: assumin the same distance for each round. Obviously a 5.56 from 2,000 yards will do less damage than a 9mm from the muzzle.
Happy ya hypocrite?
Last edited:
Since evidently we are back to allowing personal attacks:
You are a lying sack of shit. No where did I say that. You obviously can't make a single point without lying, that's how ignorant you are.
Hey everyone, want to see 85 fly into another roid rage? Just call out his bullshit statement "most handguns shootings are fatal"
Typical 85, just making up bullshit because you aren't even intelligent enough to use Google.
You spent most this entire thread raging when me and BT suggested that handguns are completely lethal at close range. You and Dingy then delusionally pointed to the fact that "no one died" in the MD shooting, which is wrong.
I can tell I've caught you on this one given the way you went straight into sheer rage and anger in your post.
As for lying, everyone with a brain in this thread has accepted that you lied your ass off about BT. This is why I call you delusional. I mean that in the most sincere sense.
One quote of where I said "But handguns don’t kill. Ninja and Dingy told me so"
It shouldn't be hard. One quote or STFU you lying sack of shit.
It shouldn't be hard. One quote or STFU you lying sack of shit.
Shouldn't you be crying and whining about insults?
Here you go, snowflake. Your post below directly insinuated that a handgun is subpar as a lethal weapon and is the reason that no one died, vs. the "assurance" of death if an AR was used. Now, I know as 100% fact that you'll go into yet another rage, throw insults around, and insist you're right once again. But you're not. So we'll just let you rage as you wish.
"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,"
Oh, and then there's the fact that dingy compared a handgun to him stupidly pointing his fingers and going "pew pew".
Yes, that actually happened.
Yes, that actually happened.
No where did I say handguns don't kill people nor did I insinuate that. You are a lying sack of shit. Not a personal insult, that is a fact.
Ninja must have been having nightmares last night about the cooler. He's gone off the ledge now.
Lol keep riding those coattails Bob it's so cute when you try. Obviously you meant 85, since he's taking your tactic of just straight lying when he realizes he's been embarrassed too many times
He’s truly deranged.
Given his hate of Christians and love for firearms, my fear is he’ll be the next church shooter. I’m not kidding either.
I thought I pointed out that what you think doesn't matter, hypocrite. A little slower than normal today?
This coming from the guy who wished people to seriously die in a fire. Why can't you post a single threatening thing I've said?
Look, everyone here knows you get embarrassed easily, and lash out with your bi-weekly hate filled petty personal attacks. All because I point out that you say stuff that is just wrong. Like your total BS on handguns killing most people. You are not a smart person, and try to make up for it with internet tough guy talk. Classic TDS
Lying more doesn't help your already difficult task of proving that you aren't a roid raged filled out job
.You can't even quote one time where I've threatened someone, yet you've wished death on members of this board.
Lying more doesn't help your already difficult task of proving that you aren't a roid raged filled out job
You can't even quote one time where I've threatened someone, yet you've wished death on members of this board.
lol you've honestly gone off the deep end.
PS- I thought you were crying about meanie insults now. You're sure doing a lot of that now. Or does that explain your delusions; maybe split personalities?
Still nothing but obvious deflection. Want me to remind everyone again how you told me to "seriously go die in a fire"?
LOL. You precious snowflake. It's a term used to say "f*ck off" with a little more emphasis behind it.
I know you know that it's not implying anything beyond that, you're just so desperate to piss and moan about me that you're now going down this route. Snowflake Central.
While we're on it, coward, do you want to finally own claiming that Bob wants to "round up and exterminate all Muslims"? You made this claim and for the 3,000th time have avoided being held to account for it. Probably because it's insane, heinous, and disgusting.
So own it. Go ahead.
Could you deflect any more obviously? What next you going to the classic "Waaaaah" that dignald your roid shrunk brain has run out of processing power? Or accuse more people of being the next school/movie/church shooter simple because they have embarrassed the shit out of you. ![[roll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/roll.r191677.gif "roll [roll]")
I asked you a simple question that you've now avoided yet again.
You accused Bob of wanting to "round up and exterminate all Muslims". Why did you make this claim? Own it, coward.
You accused Bob of wanting to "round up and exterminate all Muslims". Why did you make this claim? Own it, coward.
I love how willfully ignorant 85 is that he can't understand that me making the fingers/pew pew reference was in response to his asinine comment of:
"He could have targeted more than 2 kids with a handgun just the same as he could have with an AR." and then tried to deflect the discussion to praising the LEO, which NOBODY IN HERE HAS EVER NOT DONE
...and THEN claim that we are somehow attempting to connect the lethal capabilities of firearms to the response of the LEO, which also NOBODY ever has done in here. Apparently, 85 doesn't realize the point of the discussion argument ninja and I are/were making: lethality matters, and lethality of weapons differ. But apparently for 85 targeting someone is the same as killing them, and you can kill just as easily regardless of weapon type. weapon types don't matter. So, a kid hell-bent on causing mayhem in his school could just as effectively kill the same # of people, with equal amounts of lethality using a .38 revolver, 18th century musket, AR-15, gatlin gun, .22, doesn't matter. got it.
"He could have targeted more than 2 kids with a handgun just the same as he could have with an AR." and then tried to deflect the discussion to praising the LEO, which NOBODY IN HERE HAS EVER NOT DONE
...and THEN claim that we are somehow attempting to connect the lethal capabilities of firearms to the response of the LEO, which also NOBODY ever has done in here. Apparently, 85 doesn't realize the point of the discussion argument ninja and I are/were making: lethality matters, and lethality of weapons differ. But apparently for 85 targeting someone is the same as killing them, and you can kill just as easily regardless of weapon type. weapon types don't matter. So, a kid hell-bent on causing mayhem in his school could just as effectively kill the same # of people, with equal amounts of lethality using a .38 revolver, 18th century musket, AR-15, gatlin gun, .22, doesn't matter. got it.
also, maybe the fact that only 2 kids were shot was because he only shot 2 kids. a minute passed, according to reports, from the time those shots were fired until the LEO got to him and tried to get him to drop the weapon. One minute is a lot of time. This kid clearly didn't want to shoot up the school,but kill the chick who dumped him and the kid she was talking to. Also, it has YET to be determined whether or not the LEO actually killed him or if he shot himself. Either way, the LEO's actions are great, yes. But that isn't in question. What is in question is whether this kid could have killed more people with a different weapon. Arguing that weapon type doesn't matter isn't ignorance; it's you being disingenuous and dishonest.
Actually, you and Ninja, as usual, have been arguing against SOMETHING THAT WAS NEVER ACTUALLY SAID TO BEGIN WITH.
The entire story was ABOUT THE SPEED OF THE LEO IN RESPONDING AND THE FACT THAT ONLY 2 KIDS WERE HIT. That has NOTHING to do with weapon choice.
You then transitioned this to a debate on lethality, which also just became not credible since someone f'ing died from this handgun shooting.
Just admit you used a supremely stupid example and we can move on.
Nope, dingy weapon type is irrelevant, 85 said so. Also watch out, you fared fa question 85, you will probably be labeled the next school shooter.
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
***UCF making a push for transfer committed elsewhere***- Latest: UCFVanWilder
