- Joined
- Aug 6, 2019
- Messages
- 15,086
- Reaction score
- 6,810
- Location
- Bridgeport, CT
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
HK protesters with Colt 45's against the PLA
Riiiiiight.
Do you think they are better off being disarmed?
HK protesters with Colt 45's against the PLA
Riiiiiight.
Shotguns work and can be more lethal than an AR15. A “standard” 12 gauge load of #00 Buck contains nine pellets. Each pellet larger than a 223 REM bullet (AR15 ammo). That means 6 pulls of the trigger of a shotgun can shoot out 54 pellets. This load is the most common used to hunt deer in wooded areas. Certainly more deadly in a crowd or theater shooting than an AR15.Not shoot the 11 year old who's just looking to steal some food.
But if you really have a concern that Ninja-commandos might execute a military style assault on your house, get a shotgun.
Do you think they are better off being disarmed?
I would call that condition normal! Making up crap!Calamity is upset the protesters didn’t start a gunfight now he’s pulling crap out his ass to make up for his disappointment.
Shotguns work and can be more lethal than an AR15. A “standard” 12 gauge load of #00 Buck contains nine pellets. Each pellet larger than a 223 REM bullet (AR15 ammo). That means 6 pulls of the trigger of a shotgun can shoot out 54 pellets. This load is the most common used to hunt deer in wooded areas. Certainly more deadly in a crowd or theater shooting than an AR15.
Yes - a lot better off.
My point is that trying to regulate good guns from bad is not useful. What is your point? Are you for regulating handguns only?A 20 gauge "youth" model Remington is supposedly twice as powerful as a 44 Magnum revolver
A full power 12 gauge is the most lethal firearm a civilian can put in their shoulder...certainly at ranges for home defense.
When sheep can carry firearms we will eat less mutton.Yes - a lot better off.
Is it your view that in a confrontation with a hostile government, the people are always better off if they are disarmed?
Or are there times when being armed is a benefit?
And when all the governments are dictatorships and their populations disarmed? You forget about our own revolution.It is my view that people should never seek confrontation to overthrow what you call a "hostile government" - it will not end well
Dictatorships are almost never overthrown from within
Almost always a dictatorship is weakened by external factors or the intervention of other countries, like the US invasion of Iraq causing Saddam's downfall.
My point is that trying to regulate good guns from bad is not useful. What is your point? Are you for regulating handguns only?
When sheep can carry firearms we will eat less mutton.
And when all the governments are dictatorships and their populations disarmed? You forget about our own revolution.
It is my view that people should never seek confrontation to overthrow what you call a "hostile government" - it will not end well
The Hong Kong protesters are not trying to overthrow the CCP.
I'm asking you if a group of people are being attacked by the government which claims to rule over them, are they ever better off armed?
I'm pretty sure (but not positive, correct me if I'm wrong) that you've said owning a gun for self-defense typically makes you worse off. I want to know if you believe the same thing regarding groups of people, instead of a single individual.
Would concealed carry, security, law enforcement also be restricted? Also there were assault rifles and machine pistols before 1945. The Sturmgewehr-44, or StG-44 was the first mass produced assault rifle around 1943No, I have repeatedly listed those weapons I would exempt from a gun ban, I would ban all guns, then exempt
Muzzle loaders
Single shot hunting rifles
Double and single barreled shotguns
Pump/lever action shotguns with a capacity of no more than three
"Classic" firearms - ie: those built in or before 1945
And I do so by listing (for firearms built after 1945) by listing the make/serial number of all exempted guns.
We thought it was a tyranny, that is why we revolted.The American Revolution wasn't against a tyranny or dictatorship. That's why it could be successful.
Would concealed carry, security, law enforcement also be restricted? Also there were assault rifles and machine pistols before 1945. The Sturmgewehr-44, or StG-44 was the first mass produced assault rifle around 1943
We thought it was a tyranny, that is why we revolted.
What about the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto uprising? I think they only had a few dozen rifles and pistols. They were only able to kill about 100 Nazis, and in the end, having a few dozen firearms didn't save them, although it did delay their transportation to the death camps by a few months.No, they are not
It is interesting to see that the Nazis are again the ones loading up on arms. Obviously there is a psychological connection to explore there.What about the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto uprising? I think they only had a few dozen rifles and pistols. They were only able to kill about 100 Nazis, and in the end, having a few dozen firearms didn't save them, although it did delay their transportation to the death camps by a few months.
If you had been there in 1943, would you have advised them not to arm themselves?
What about the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto uprising? I think they only had a few dozen rifles and pistols. They were only able to kill about 100 Nazis, and in the end, having a few dozen firearms didn't save them, although it did delay their transportation to the death camps by a few months.
If you had been there in 1943, would you have advised them not to arm themselves?
Well that actually was in wartime, but in any case the Jews lost
Right, but if you had been there in 1943, would you have advised them not to arm themselves? Do you think it was a mistake for them to arm themselves and attempt to fight against the Nazi government?
No, they should've armed themselves,
but chosen a later time to revolt and in actual fact a delay of just over a year would probably been sufficient.
When the deportations first began, members of the Jewish resistance movement met and decided not to fight the SS directives, believing that the Jews were being sent to labour camps and not to their deaths. But by the end of 1942, ghetto inhabitants learned that the deportations were part of an extermination process. Many of the remaining Jews decided to revolt.[14] The first armed resistance in the ghetto occurred in January 1943.[15]
On 19 April 1943, Passover eve, the Germans entered the ghetto. The remaining Jews knew that the Germans would murder them and they decided to resist to the last.