Except WWI and WWII trench guns do not hold 20 rounds and are single loaded.

Not even modern goose tubes or 3 gun tubes hold that.

You can run and take fire faster with a push button box fed magazine.

I do not practice the whole taticool stuff although I do not mind others do as long as they are safe. I think if you hunt you should practice reloading and firing as well as you can. I see no reason why my firearms handling upsets you.

Your point is not relevant to the conversation. I do not claim to be able to run a bolt under fire. I claim to be able to run one better than those using ARs in mass murder situations.

A bolt rifle, semi shot gun tube mag, lever, or pump cannot keep up w a box fed push button release magazine. That is the point. Place the operation in any setting you want.

Of course, you are aware of the antithesis concerning WWI trench gun.

quote:

REPORT OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CONSTITUTION OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY UNITED STATES SENATE NINETY-SEVENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION

eagle crest, FEBRUARY 1982, Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

quote:

Subsequent legislation in the second Congress likewise supports the interpretation of the Second Amendment that creates an individual right. In the Militia Act of 1792, the second Congress defined "militia of the United States" to include almost every free adult male in the United States. These persons were obligated by law to possess a firearm and a minimum supply of ammunition and military equipment. This statute, incidentally, remained in effect into the early years of the present century as a legal requirement of gun ownership for most of the population of the United States. There can be little doubt from this that when the Congress and the people spoke of a "militia", they had reference to the traditional concept of the entire populace capable of bearing arms, and not to any formal group such as what is today called the National Guard. The purpose was to create an armed citizenry, which the political theorists at the time considered essential to ward off tyranny. From this militia, appropriate measures might create a "well regulated militia" of individuals trained in their duties and responsibilities as citizens and owners of firearms.

Lots of interesting things to read here
https://guncite.com/journals/senrpt/senrpt.html

quote:

REPORT OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CONSTITUTION OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY UNITED STATES SENATE NINETY-SEVENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION

eagle crest

FEBRUARY 1982

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

----

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

quote:

Originally posted by rabbithabit:
From 1983 to 1993, there were 11 murderous rampages in U.S. post offices. On August 20, 1986, the worst of these incidents took place in Edmond, Oklahoma. Pat Sherrill, who was about to be fired, killed 14 mail workers, wounded another five, and then shot himself to death as the SWAT team arrived.

Army trained and used a 1911.

Thank you for the update from 30 years ago.

Few of these mass murders are trained military. That is part of the point.

It's your expertise you try to claim while having never been in combat. Your whole " I would choose a BAR" has got to be as dumb as it gets.
My point, that you cannot get. Is even without semi-auto rifles a combatant can cause extreme damage and death when the conditions are of their choosing. A movie theater, bar, bowling alley. Confined areas, large crowds.
Until the "black guns" became the boogey man, these exact same comments were used to want to ban handguns.

What we know. That the majority of the mass shootings are done with either semiautomatic assault rifles or high capacity magazine pistols. What we do not know. Whether individuals that would otherwise have access to such weapons, would (1) resort to some other weapon to perpetrate their atrocities, or (2) be able to kill or wound as many victims, if they were denied access access to such weapons through waiting periods, enhanced background checks, other.

Personally, I am not going to look the parent of a child killed in a mass shooting or the child of a mother killed in a mass shooting in the eye and tell them that I am unwilling to even try to restrict access to such weapons because my right to get one of those weapons quickly and easily trumps the interests of trying to protect their child or mother and oh, by the way, there is no use even trying because I have already assumed that perpetrators will just use some other means to commit their crimes and will be just as successful in doing so. Sacrificing a few children or other innocent victims now and then is just the price we have to pay to ensure that my right to painlessly and effortlessly purchase a semiautomatic assault rifle is protected.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
And I never said they were “equal” weapons.

I said: In any of the situations mentioned (the only one I exclude is Las Vegas), give the shooter a short barreled Browning Auto-5 (a gun in common use by hunters since 1905) and the casualties stay the same and I don’t see the incident disappearing.

No, you said:

quote:

Knowledge you are apparently lacking. We had this conversation in your absence and consensus was with my assertion.

I asked for a link to such a conversation as this thread disproves your assertion about such a "consensus".

The high casualty counts stem from the volume of fire being too overwhelming to allow people to react to either respond or escape. A shotgun is certainly devastating at short range but once it's emptied the time spent reloading provides an opportunity for people to either get away or brain you with an ashtray while you reload.

How many projectiles does 5 rounds of 0 buckshot put out from a semiautomatic short barrel 12 gauge in a few seconds? Hint- it’s a lot! And the vast majority of these shootings take place in a confined environment.

When you are criminal and desperate at that, you will find ways to do most damage no matter what the restrictions are
Some people just live in bubble when they think more laws will stop criminals

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:
How many projectiles does 5 rounds of 0 buckshot put out from a semiautomatic short barrel 12 gauge in a few seconds? Hint- it’s a lot! And the vast majority of these shootings take place in a confined environment.

C'mon now, you know as well as any of us that at "confined environment" ranges each charge of buckshot is going to separate very little, if any, so multiple casualties per shot are unlikely.

I'd expect such nonsense from somebody who learned everything they know about guns from YouTube but not you.

I had one of those duck foot spreader chokes someone gave me. At 30 feet, it was a nasty thing. I think the spreaders inside it, distorted the shot and made them fly wider than if it was smooth internals.
I gave it to someone else, once you play with it to see what it will do, what purpose does it serve? When I flock shoot starlings out of the corn fields, I just wait until they get out 40 yds or so. They drop like rain then.

quote:

Originally posted by theback40:
I had one of those duck foot spreader chokes someone gave me. At 30 feet, it was a nasty thing. I think the spreaders inside it, distorted the shot and made them fly wider than if it was smooth internals.
I gave it to someone else, once you play with it to see what it will do, what purpose does it serve? When I flock shoot starlings out of the corn fields, I just wait until they get out 40 yds or so. They drop like rain then.

Only one I ever played with scattered the shot pretty randomly, a clump here, a thin pattern there, holes in the middle a rabbit could calmly sit in untouched.

Yeah, round shot flies different than randomly-shaped chunks of lead. Who knew?

quote:

Originally posted by Bivoj:
When you are criminal and desperate at that, you will find ways to do most damage no matter what the restrictions are
Some people just live in bubble when they think more laws will stop criminals

. . . complete speculation. Why do we not see mass shootings/killings in other countries with restrictions?

I was visiting an Aussie pal one time. We were at his cousins farm, who was complaining about the roos coming into his yard at night.
He had a singleshot 12 ga with a burst barrel. He had cut it off at about 12-14" and cut the stock into a pistol grip. Yes illegal, but way out in back of nowhere on a farm no-one cared.
I laid in the back of the truck with that thing loaded with BB's or No 2"s. My friend had the spotlight, and his cousin drove around the yard.
A big red roo jumped aside from in front of the truck. Bob hit it with the spotlight to freeze it, and I popped up and gave it a blast from...... I dont remember, but close.
We skinned the roo out, and cut the meat off for dogfood for the sheep dogs.
That thing had pellets from head to the base of it's tail!
I have shot a few others shortened up. They spread shot like no tomorrow in a circular pattern. Nothing you want to be in front of.

Again, unless some exception is carved out the S. Ct., has said you cannot just ban Arms in common use for lawful purposes.

That includes self defense. A ban does not appear worth talking about.

Red Flag laws,
Voluntary commitments,
Waiting periods,
What gets reported to the background system
Taxing and registration

Are worth debating from a level point of view.

Non violent felons are going to win at the S. Ct.

Both the Eastern and Western Fed Districts have invalidated EPO/DVO/IPO restriction found on federal law. I expect that one to get tossed. The cards are pending to the 6th Circuit.

The 6th Circuit in Taylor stated bans on “violent persons” are constitutional. I expect the S. Ct., to agree.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Again, unless some exception is carved out the S. Ct., has said you cannot just ban Arms in common use for lawful purposes.

That includes self defense. A ban does not appear worth talking about.

Red Flag laws,
Voluntary commitments,
Waiting periods,
What gets reported to the background system
Taxing and registration

Are worth debating from a level point of view.

Non violent felons are going to win at the S. Ct.

Both the Eastern and Western Fed Districts have invalidated EPO/DVO/IPO restriction found on federal law. I expect that one to get tossed. The cards are pending to the 6th Circuit.

The 6th Circuit in Taylor stated bans on “violent persons” are constitutional. I expect the S. Ct., to agree.

Do you see the same legal hurdle for capping magazine capacity?

I see the same argument being made. If the above argument is advanced, I have no idea how it would break. I give it a 50/50.

That is why I like the idea, from a legal viewpoint, of adding them to the NFA.

Jeffive, I assume your proposed magazine capacity limit of six would also apply to handguns.

The police like to have larger capacity magazines. I figure they are the experts on the best tools for self-defense.

If they think they need more than six rounds to defend themselves, I do too.

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
Jeffive, I assume your proposed magazine capacity limit of six would also apply to handguns.

The police like to have larger capacity magazines. I figure they are the experts on the best tools for self-defense.

If they think they need more than six rounds to defend themselves, I do too.

Yes, all centerfire autos.

Need more than 6 rounds? Carry two guns.

Cops need all that ammo because, generally, they can't shoot for shit.

I may be wrong, but post Bruen I do not think the State magazine Ben’s are faring well at the Fed Circuit Courts. I have heard such. I have not read the cases.

I have killed truck loads of hogs out of a helicopter. An M-2 Benelli with mag extension shooting 00 buck is the superior weapon to an AR-15 for this application. You just load as you sustain fire. Once you get in practice…you almost never shoot dry.

quote:

Cops need all that ammo because, generally, they can't shoot for shit.

Under the high stress of a shoot-out, I couldn't shoot for shit either.

That and cops/LE are actively required to find trouble. The job requires it. Where we armed citizens are a last resort, should not be looking for engagements.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Again, Back40, Go read the cases. The Bill of Rights were for limitations upon the Federal Government that the people created. That language is not a distinction.

Those cases were “opinions” written by a different set of Justices.

EXACTLY!!!!

Little lord fontleroy is 100% behind activist rulings he agrees with!!

The most loathsome type of lawyer!


.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

Anyone who says anything other than what I have written, which is a distillation of case law concerning the “original intent” is lying at this point.

Yeah!!!!

If you don't agree with little lord fontleroy, you are a liar!

Liberalism at its most deranged.....


.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
The NFA defines restricted arms. I have always argued that the NFA preempted these state bans. However, no one has ever made that argument in Court.

And the NFA is based upon lies. Fact! But since it is law a simple minded idiot like you thinks its sacrosanct.......


.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by nute:
Just out of interest what defines an assault rifle?

The 1994 Assault Weapons Ban tried to define them with a bunch of extraneous shit like flash hiders and bayonet lugs and pistol grips, all of which gun makers were able to design around.

It's much simpler to define and ban "Detachable magazines for centerfire weapons capable of holding more than 6 rounds." Plus it doesn't take anybody's guns away.

We don't get these huge death tolls because a gun looks like what a soldier would carry, we get huge death tolls because of the volume of fire that a semi-automatic with 20 or 30 round magazines can deliver in a short time.

A 20” barreled Browning Auto-5 12g made in 1905 with 00 buck and a bandolier of shells to allow loading while shooting will accomplish the same effect. Or a Benelli M2 or etc etc.

Or a dump truck at a parade.....we must ban dump trucks!!!!!


..

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
The Federalist Papers are not authoritative. They were propaganda to gain support for the Constitution.

Go read the cases. All states had standing militias. The intent was to keep Congress from disarming state militias. That is not my interpretation. That is straight from the cases.

Go read.

Yeah, that's the ticket

The federalist papers where just propaganda......you are a sad case junior.....no wonder no one pays attention to millenials....

Indoctrinated much????


.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
The Second Amendment never granted an individual right to possess a firearm.

The Second was simply a restriction upon Congress to keep Congress from disarming state militias which all state adult males would belong to at the time. The Second never had nor did it intend to confers right upon any individual.

Go read
City of Baltimore v Barron
US v Curikshsnk
Presser v Illinois
Slaughter House cases
Heller and McDonald

Justice Scalia even recognized the Second did not confer an individual right. He never held the right to possess a firearm, in and of itself was a fundamental right.

What Heller and McDonald say is the right to self defense in our system was a long, historical recognized fundamental right. That this right to self defense extended to using arms in common use at the ratification of the 2nd Amendment being handguns. Thus, Heller and McDonald Incorporate the 2nd as Justice Scilla wrote arms in common use were necessary to give affect to this right of self defense and other legal purposes.

Just wow!!!!

That's a real stretch of jurisprudence......

There is no stretch to it. It is what those cases say. It does not matter if you like it. Go read them. It is not a stretch. It is the original intent of the Bill of Rights collectively and specifically to the 2nd. Go read.

What you think is not what it was.

Technically, those holding are not overturned directly. Justice Scilla expressly refused to overturn the Slaughterhouse Cases. Instead, he goes through a different doctrine. That being selective Incorporation through “Substantive Due Process” of the 14th Amendment.

Go read. I have posted exact language with full citation multiple times.

Your understanding was never correct.

At this point you are not ignorant. You are just a lier. My job is not to tell you what you want to hear, or what feels good. My job is to tell you what the Constitution, through its Amendments then and now.

I Do not want you take my word for it. I have given you the cases go read them yourself.

I can send you a draft of brief I have pending in Circuit Court in the issue. It is just 16ish pages of the above with chapter and versus.

A lier? Really????

For some reason your education seems lacking.....

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
Knowledge you are apparently lacking. We had this conversation in your absence and consensus was with my assertion.

We are not talking about sustained fire for hours against waves of NVA. We are talking entering a place of unsuspecting civilians and sustaining fire for 15 - 30 minutes. This shooter or the Sandy Hook Shooter or the Uvalde shooter — all would have accomplished the same with an A-5 with buckshot.

All true.

But an Auto 5 doesn't scare men that wear panties near as bad as an evil AR!!!!!


.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
Knowledge you are apparently lacking. We had this conversation in your absence and consensus was with my assertion.

We are not talking about sustained fire for hours against waves of NVA. We are talking entering a place of unsuspecting civilians and sustaining fire for 15 - 30 minutes. This shooter or the Sandy Hook Shooter or the Uvalde shooter — all would have accomplished the same with an A-5 with buckshot.

Then why aren’t mass shooters using A5’s with buckshot? Your statement is complete speculation.

I just watched a report about Uvalde breaking ground on a new school to replace Robb Elementary. The report included interviews with parents of these small children killed in the attack. There is no way I could look these parents in the eye and tell them that my right to buy an AR15 without enhanced review is more important than trying to keep such weapons out of the hands of mass shooters. No way I could tell them that me having to wait to get an AR15, to have to go through a comprehensive background check, etc. is not worth the possibility of reducing the likelihood of another elementary school shooting. It is no accident that mass shooters use semiautomatic assault rifles and high capacity magazine pistols. All the talk about mass shooters just using something else if denied access to the clear weapons of choice is just rank speculation aimed at deflection.

What would you tell them about the cowardly law enforcement that failed to do their sworn duty?????

Its much easier to blame the gun......

.

quote:

Originally posted by rabbithabit:
From 1983 to 1993, there were 11 murderous rampages in U.S. post offices. On August 20, 1986, the worst of these incidents took place in Edmond, Oklahoma. Pat Sherrill, who was about to be fired, killed 14 mail workers, wounded another five, and then shot himself to death as the SWAT team arrived.

Army trained and used a 1911.

That was probably an AR 1911!


Odd that "most" 1911s are a 7 round mag......

Dear God, what are we gonna do!

quote:

Originally posted by theback40:
There is a reason extended mag shotguns are called trench guns, or riot guns. Maximum damage in close situations of multiple targets.
Round count, one for one is not the comparison.
A 9+1 extended mag 12 ga, with No 4 buckshot. 24-28 pellets per shell, call it 25. That is 250 projectiles without reloading.
There is a reason James Holmes, the movie theater shooter killed 12 and injured 62 with a shotgun.
Heym, come brag to me how fast you are shooting and loading, while running and taking fire yourself. Another schoolboy wanna-be, tough guy.

Ouch!

More like over educated under intelligent millenial....

.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
That and cops/LE are actively required to find trouble. The job requires it. Where we armed citizens are a last resort, should not be looking for engagements.

I don't see the difference. Cops don't look for gunfights. If I have two or more thugs shooting at me, I want more than six rounds to shoot back.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

REPORT OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CONSTITUTION OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY UNITED STATES SENATE NINETY-SEVENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION

eagle crest, FEBRUARY 1982, Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

quote:

Subsequent legislation in the second Congress likewise supports the interpretation of the Second Amendment that creates an individual right. In the Militia Act of 1792, the second Congress defined "militia of the United States" to include almost every free adult male in the United States. These persons were obligated by law to possess a firearm and a minimum supply of ammunition and military equipment. This statute, incidentally, remained in effect into the early years of the present century as a legal requirement of gun ownership for most of the population of the United States. There can be little doubt from this that when the Congress and the people spoke of a "militia", they had reference to the traditional concept of the entire populace capable of bearing arms, and not to any formal group such as what is today called the National Guard. The purpose was to create an armed citizenry, which the political theorists at the time considered essential to ward off tyranny. From this militia, appropriate measures might create a "well regulated militia" of individuals trained in their duties and responsibilities as citizens and owners of firearms.

Lots of interesting things to read here
https://guncite.com/journals/senrpt/senrpt.html

quote:

REPORT OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CONSTITUTION OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY UNITED STATES SENATE NINETY-SEVENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION

eagle crest

FEBRUARY 1982

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

----

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

Just propaganda......Little lord fontleroy will tell you!!!!


.

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by rabbithabit:
From 1983 to 1993, there were 11 murderous rampages in U.S. post offices. On August 20, 1986, the worst of these incidents took place in Edmond, Oklahoma. Pat Sherrill, who was about to be fired, killed 14 mail workers, wounded another five, and then shot himself to death as the SWAT team arrived.

Army trained and used a 1911.

Thank you for the update from 30 years ago.

A whole lot of y'all are saying that only an Ar15 can be used to kill a lot of people.

quote:

Originally posted by rabbithabit:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by rabbithabit:
From 1983 to 1993, there were 11 murderous rampages in U.S. post offices. On August 20, 1986, the worst of these incidents took place in Edmond, Oklahoma. Pat Sherrill, who was about to be fired, killed 14 mail workers, wounded another five, and then shot himself to death as the SWAT team arrived.

Army trained and used a 1911.

Thank you for the update from 30 years ago.

A whole lot of y'all are saying that only an Ar15 can be used to kill a lot of people.

No, but an AR and high capacity handguns are the typical choice.

The level of scrutiny is much higher to purchase a class III firearm and we have virtually zero crimes committed with them. I do not think that is a coincidence.

quote:

Originally posted by skb:


The level of scrutiny is much higher to purchase a class III firearm and we have virtually zero crimes committed with them. I do not think that is a coincidence.

Steve,
are you saying, specifically, that there are few crimes committed with ACTUAL "licensed class III firearms" SPECIFICALLY? I can agree with that highly specialized specific group of firearms - However, I presume you are NOT stating that there are no crimes committed with unlicensed same, such as the infamous glock switch, or, in fact, other illegal firearms (of all types)

On another point - weapons used in mass shootings '82 to 23
https://www.statista.com/stati...y-weapon-types-used/
(note - the number of weapons used is higher than the total number of shootings)
165 pistols
69 rifles (of any description - i do wonder how they count Nashville, as in what type of weapon and how many)
31 shotguns

There is a gross fault in the statista data, in that it infers "known/solved" mass shootings, that is, it ignores things like unsolved mass shooting in Chiraq, among other locations - https://www.statista.com/stati...-in-the-us-by-state/ this isn't supposition, as it lists only FIVE mass shootings in Illinois in the 41 year period


Oh, another interesting data point - in that cities have WAY higher murder rates than the rest of states
https://www.statista.com/stati...n-us-cities-in-2015/

quote:

Originally posted by skb:

quote:

Originally posted by rabbithabit:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by rabbithabit:
From 1983 to 1993, there were 11 murderous rampages in U.S. post offices. On August 20, 1986, the worst of these incidents took place in Edmond, Oklahoma. Pat Sherrill, who was about to be fired, killed 14 mail workers, wounded another five, and then shot himself to death as the SWAT team arrived.

Army trained and used a 1911.

Thank you for the update from 30 years ago.

A whole lot of y'all are saying that only an Ar15 can be used to kill a lot of people.

No, but an AR and high capacity handguns are the typical choice.

The level of scrutiny is much higher to purchase a class III firearm and we have virtually zero crimes committed with them. I do not think that is a coincidence.

Therein lies the rub. Enhanced scrutiny and time equate to inconvenience and well, inconvenience is just not worth the possibility of stopping or reducing mass shootings involving semiautomatic assault rifles and high capacity magazine pistols. If the trade off for convenience is a handful of elementary school children from time to time, or some innocent folks shopping at a mall or going to church, well so be it. We have to do everything possible to protect my right to walk into a gun store and walk out 30 minutes later with an AR along with a dozen 20 round magazines and hundreds of rounds of ammunition . . . don't you get it, it's that whole from my cold dead hands thingy. Besides, it is a well known fact, that if we make it more difficult for folks that shouldn't have these weapons to get them, they will just start committing mass killings with equal effectiveness with ice picks, baseball bats, bike chains and anything else around the house they can get their hands on. Everybody knows that.

Yes Jeffe,
I am saying very few crimes are committed with class III firearms which were purchased legally and the buyer has undergone an enhanced background check as required to obtain an NFA firearm.

You will always have illegal guns and the crimes committed by those in possession of them.

It appears to me the enhanced background checks usually stop NFA weapons from reaching the wrong hands, far more so than the standard NICS check.

Steve