|
abacacus
Rock 'N Roll Outlaw
Joined: Apr 16, 2007
Age: 21
Posts: 3315
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2012 12:58 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| AceOfSpades wrote: | | abacacus wrote: | Yeah, guns aren't the best negotiating tool unless you have reason to believe pulling it will scare the assailant off.
At close range (I think it's twenty feet) knives are actually more lethal in decently skilled hands. |
You're thinking of the distance someone with a knife can close before you can pull a gun out. What does that have to do with skill? It's just sheer adrenaline.
|
Skill comes in with whether or not you can get a quick hit in with a knife that will actually hurt the other dude.
_________________
A shot gun blast into the face of deceit
You'll gain your just reward.
We'll not rest until the purge is complete
You will reap what you've sown. |
|
| Back to top |
|
CoMF
Deinonychus
Joined: Feb 08, 2012
Posts: 328
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2012 1:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Only "alarming" in the sense that it's probably going to make ammo more scarce commercially and result in an increase of prices, due to diminished supply and tin-foilers panic buying what's currently available...
Besides, I think almost all Law Enforcement Agencies practice with what they carry nowadays, hence why they'd require so much ammo. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Inventor
Phoenix
Joined: Feb 16, 2007
Posts: 5111
Location: New Orleans
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2012 4:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
450 million, with 330 million people, who own two guns per person.
That is 1.5 rounds per person, and the person in this case with several guns, and a lot more ammo.
A takeover by government resisted by 10% of the people would pit a million government employees, Armed Forces, HS, against 33 million armed with scoped deer rifles, with four times the range.
The odds change when the Armed Forces side with their parents, siblings, neighbors, and bring their skills and weapons to join the Free American Army.
Imagine our forces in Afganistan, armed only with hand guns, facing fifty times as many armed with scoped rifles. It would be a very short war.
Our government was rightfully set up where the government does have to fear the people.
On the other side, training a half million in the use of small arms, a thousand rounds each is but basic training. They do need to be taught, do not shoot yourself, the people you are working with, or innocent bystanders.
Training is on a range, with a range officer, strict rules, still targets, facing forward. Gun fights are in the dark, at close range, with innocents, hostages, human shields, with perhaps several shooting at you. Guns are loud, and loudest when you are in front of them. Bright flashes, deffening sound, everything moving, bullets hitting all around you.
Now calmly pick out the shooters, and as body armor is common, go for head shots, that will not kill the people behind them. Relax, take your time, do it right, in a half second.
Remember, you will be very embareassed, a second later if several ghosts are asking your ghost why you killed them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
webcam
Velociraptor
Joined: Feb 09, 2012
Posts: 427
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2012 2:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
On the topic of hollow points, why do we need to kill people? Shouldn't we focus on ammunition that can temporarily paralyze a person?
Think about the cost of firing a bullet, or alot of them in some kind of urban warfare:
Every bullet costs lots of money to remove and people can spend months recuperating if they don't die. These are people who need to be replaced at work and the whole thing costs money... lots of money to deploy lots of bullets, and it'll cost you alot of friends and family when sh** goes down. So why not limit the use of weapons to instant tranquilizers? Then people wake up a few hours later and are fine. No medical costs, no continuous avenging of peoples death... just make sure everyone wears a helmet so when they hit the ground there are no injuries.
Or we could all just do laser tag when it comes to war... getting shot disables your laser and turns on a red light on your armor that signals that you need to be removed from the battlefield so you can't interfere.
Seriously, the issue here is with the obsession with death and killing as being righteous. If we have truly evolved, our weapons wouldn't kill. A trank gun is actually better if you think about it... so you miss the head or heart shot and the guy is still going around with his automatic and shooting people... so you keep shooting and he kills a few more while you're trying to get the head/heart shot. Now with a trank gun, you shoot him the pinky... he goes down, nobody dies. How cool is that? Just make sure you're the best trank gunslinger around and that trank guns are close analogues to real guns just in case. But the trank gun should always be the first thing you reach for. |
|
| Back to top |
|
abacacus
Rock 'N Roll Outlaw
Joined: Apr 16, 2007
Age: 21
Posts: 3315
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2012 2:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Tranquilliser darts are more expensive than bullets, and can be every bit as lethal if the target happens to have an allergy to that specific drug. They also won't stop someone whose on a strong stimulant (large doses of cocaine, meth, speed, etc).
What you're suggesting wouldn't be nearly as reliable or cost effective and would still lead to deaths. It's foolish to think it could work.
_________________
A shot gun blast into the face of deceit
You'll gain your just reward.
We'll not rest until the purge is complete
You will reap what you've sown. |
|
| Back to top |
|
webcam
Velociraptor
Joined: Feb 09, 2012
Posts: 427
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2012 6:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| abacacus wrote: | Tranquilliser darts are more expensive than bullets, and can be every bit as lethal if the target happens to have an allergy to that specific drug. They also won't stop someone whose on a strong stimulant (large doses of cocaine, meth, speed, etc).
What you're suggesting wouldn't be nearly as reliable or cost effective and would still lead to deaths. It's foolish to think it could work. |
Bullets cost lives... how is that cost effective? We can regulate drugs the way LEAP wants to and keep that from becoming a problem. Just make sure LEAP doesn't promote any more social pretense. I've had enough of that stuff. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Dox47
Consigliere
Joined: Jan 29, 2008
Posts: 5179
Location: Seattle Area
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2012 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| webcam wrote: | On the topic of hollow points, why do we need to kill people? Shouldn't we focus on ammunition that can temporarily paralyze a person?
Think about the cost of firing a bullet, or alot of them in some kind of urban warfare:
Every bullet costs lots of money to remove and people can spend months recuperating if they don't die. These are people who need to be replaced at work and the whole thing costs money... lots of money to deploy lots of bullets, and it'll cost you alot of friends and family when sh** goes down. So why not limit the use of weapons to instant tranquilizers? Then people wake up a few hours later and are fine. No medical costs, no continuous avenging of peoples death... just make sure everyone wears a helmet so when they hit the ground there are no injuries.
Or we could all just do laser tag when it comes to war... getting shot disables your laser and turns on a red light on your armor that signals that you need to be removed from the battlefield so you can't interfere.
Seriously, the issue here is with the obsession with death and killing as being righteous. If we have truly evolved, our weapons wouldn't kill. A trank gun is actually better if you think about it... so you miss the head or heart shot and the guy is still going around with his automatic and shooting people... so you keep shooting and he kills a few more while you're trying to get the head/heart shot. Now with a trank gun, you shoot him the pinky... he goes down, nobody dies. How cool is that? Just make sure you're the best trank gunslinger around and that trank guns are close analogues to real guns just in case. But the trank gun should always be the first thing you reach for. |
Name one instantly effective tranquilizer...
I'll wait.
_________________
Unconditional allegiance is the surest way to render one’s beliefs and agenda irrelevant
Any power that government has to do something you like will invariably be used for something you abhor
Murum aries attigit |
|
| Back to top |
|
abacacus
Rock 'N Roll Outlaw
Joined: Apr 16, 2007
Age: 21
Posts: 3315
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2012 8:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| webcam wrote: | | abacacus wrote: | Tranquilliser darts are more expensive than bullets, and can be every bit as lethal if the target happens to have an allergy to that specific drug. They also won't stop someone whose on a strong stimulant (large doses of cocaine, meth, speed, etc).
What you're suggesting wouldn't be nearly as reliable or cost effective and would still lead to deaths. It's foolish to think it could work. |
Bullets cost lives... how is that cost effective? We can regulate drugs the way LEAP wants to and keep that from becoming a problem. Just make sure LEAP doesn't promote any more social pretense. I've had enough of that stuff. |
Oh don't even bother with that spiel. Life is cheap and always has been.
And what is this about regulating drugs? Have you noticed what a massive failure drug regulation has been?
_________________
A shot gun blast into the face of deceit
You'll gain your just reward.
We'll not rest until the purge is complete
You will reap what you've sown. |
|
| Back to top |
|
webcam
Velociraptor
Joined: Feb 09, 2012
Posts: 427
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2012 9:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dox47 wrote: | | webcam wrote: | On the topic of hollow points, why do we need to kill people? Shouldn't we focus on ammunition that can temporarily paralyze a person?
Think about the cost of firing a bullet, or alot of them in some kind of urban warfare:
Every bullet costs lots of money to remove and people can spend months recuperating if they don't die. These are people who need to be replaced at work and the whole thing costs money... lots of money to deploy lots of bullets, and it'll cost you alot of friends and family when sh** goes down. So why not limit the use of weapons to instant tranquilizers? Then people wake up a few hours later and are fine. No medical costs, no continuous avenging of peoples death... just make sure everyone wears a helmet so when they hit the ground there are no injuries.
Or we could all just do laser tag when it comes to war... getting shot disables your laser and turns on a red light on your armor that signals that you need to be removed from the battlefield so you can't interfere.
Seriously, the issue here is with the obsession with death and killing as being righteous. If we have truly evolved, our weapons wouldn't kill. A trank gun is actually better if you think about it... so you miss the head or heart shot and the guy is still going around with his automatic and shooting people... so you keep shooting and he kills a few more while you're trying to get the head/heart shot. Now with a trank gun, you shoot him the pinky... he goes down, nobody dies. How cool is that? Just make sure you're the best trank gunslinger around and that trank guns are close analogues to real guns just in case. But the trank gun should always be the first thing you reach for. |
Name one instantly effective tranquilizer...
I'll wait. |
To be honest, I don't know of any. But if we put the effort into developing instant tranks that we put into other weapons, we'd have them if we don't already. |
|
| Back to top |
|
webcam
Velociraptor
Joined: Feb 09, 2012
Posts: 427
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2012 9:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| abacacus wrote: | | webcam wrote: | | abacacus wrote: | Tranquilliser darts are more expensive than bullets, and can be every bit as lethal if the target happens to have an allergy to that specific drug. They also won't stop someone whose on a strong stimulant (large doses of cocaine, meth, speed, etc).
What you're suggesting wouldn't be nearly as reliable or cost effective and would still lead to deaths. It's foolish to think it could work. |
Bullets cost lives... how is that cost effective? We can regulate drugs the way LEAP wants to and keep that from becoming a problem. Just make sure LEAP doesn't promote any more social pretense. I've had enough of that stuff. |
Oh don't even bother with that spiel. Life is cheap and always has been.
And what is this about regulating drugs? Have you noticed what a massive failure drug regulation has been? |
Prohibition has been a massive failure. Regulation wouldn't be any different than regulating alcohol or prescription drugs. Tobacco should be prohibited though, that stuff is murder#1 |
|
| Back to top |
|
blauSamstag
Phoenix
Joined: Apr 06, 2011
Posts: 1880
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2012 1:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| webcam wrote: | | abacacus wrote: | | webcam wrote: | | abacacus wrote: | Tranquilliser darts are more expensive than bullets, and can be every bit as lethal if the target happens to have an allergy to that specific drug. They also won't stop someone whose on a strong stimulant (large doses of cocaine, meth, speed, etc).
What you're suggesting wouldn't be nearly as reliable or cost effective and would still lead to deaths. It's foolish to think it could work. |
Bullets cost lives... how is that cost effective? We can regulate drugs the way LEAP wants to and keep that from becoming a problem. Just make sure LEAP doesn't promote any more social pretense. I've had enough of that stuff. |
Oh don't even bother with that spiel. Life is cheap and always has been.
And what is this about regulating drugs? Have you noticed what a massive failure drug regulation has been? |
Prohibition has been a massive failure. Regulation wouldn't be any different than regulating alcohol or prescription drugs. Tobacco should be prohibited though, that stuff is murder#1 |
I don't want to prohibit the sale of tobacco.
I just want to prohibit the production of tobacco smoke anywhere that a non-smoker might have to breathe it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
abacacus
Rock 'N Roll Outlaw
Joined: Apr 16, 2007
Age: 21
Posts: 3315
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2012 1:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| webcam wrote: | | abacacus wrote: | | webcam wrote: | | abacacus wrote: | Tranquilliser darts are more expensive than bullets, and can be every bit as lethal if the target happens to have an allergy to that specific drug. They also won't stop someone whose on a strong stimulant (large doses of cocaine, meth, speed, etc).
What you're suggesting wouldn't be nearly as reliable or cost effective and would still lead to deaths. It's foolish to think it could work. |
Bullets cost lives... how is that cost effective? We can regulate drugs the way LEAP wants to and keep that from becoming a problem. Just make sure LEAP doesn't promote any more social pretense. I've had enough of that stuff. |
Oh don't even bother with that spiel. Life is cheap and always has been.
And what is this about regulating drugs? Have you noticed what a massive failure drug regulation has been? |
Prohibition has been a massive failure. Regulation wouldn't be any different than regulating alcohol or prescription drugs. Tobacco should be prohibited though, that stuff is murder#1 |
Ever seen the side effects of some those wonderful regulated drugs you seem to so adore? They make tobacco look wimpy.
Also, again you're well over reaching your bounds and actively trying to prevent others from doing something because you think it's wrong. That will not work, and it makes you seem heavily narcissistic.
_________________
A shot gun blast into the face of deceit
You'll gain your just reward.
We'll not rest until the purge is complete
You will reap what you've sown. |
|
| Back to top |
|
blauSamstag
Phoenix
Joined: Apr 06, 2011
Posts: 1880
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2012 1:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| abacacus wrote: | | webcam wrote: | | abacacus wrote: | | webcam wrote: | | abacacus wrote: | Tranquilliser darts are more expensive than bullets, and can be every bit as lethal if the target happens to have an allergy to that specific drug. They also won't stop someone whose on a strong stimulant (large doses of cocaine, meth, speed, etc).
What you're suggesting wouldn't be nearly as reliable or cost effective and would still lead to deaths. It's foolish to think it could work. |
Bullets cost lives... how is that cost effective? We can regulate drugs the way LEAP wants to and keep that from becoming a problem. Just make sure LEAP doesn't promote any more social pretense. I've had enough of that stuff. |
Oh don't even bother with that spiel. Life is cheap and always has been.
And what is this about regulating drugs? Have you noticed what a massive failure drug regulation has been? |
Prohibition has been a massive failure. Regulation wouldn't be any different than regulating alcohol or prescription drugs. Tobacco should be prohibited though, that stuff is murder#1 |
Ever seen the side effects of some those wonderful regulated drugs you seem to so adore? They make tobacco look wimpy.
|
Side effects of nicotine use or side effects of prolonged smoke inhalation? |
|
| Back to top |
|
Dox47
Consigliere
Joined: Jan 29, 2008
Posts: 5179
Location: Seattle Area
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2012 2:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| webcam wrote: | | To be honest, I don't know of any. But if we put the effort into developing instant tranks that we put into other weapons, we'd have them if we don't already. |
Let's just say that I'm knowledgeable on this subject, and I can tell you that a lot of time, money and research has in fact gone into developing such compounds, along with other less lethal weapons such as electric, sonic and laser based devices. A successful instantaneous and effective less lethal weapon would be worth a lot of money, as can be seen with the financial success of Taser international and their far from perfect device. It's not a matter of insufficient resources being directed to the area, but simply that it's a really tough problem.
_________________
Unconditional allegiance is the surest way to render one’s beliefs and agenda irrelevant
Any power that government has to do something you like will invariably be used for something you abhor
Murum aries attigit |
|
| Back to top |
|
CoMF
Deinonychus
Joined: Feb 08, 2012
Posts: 328
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2012 11:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| blauSamstag wrote: | I don't want to prohibit the sale of tobacco.
I just want to prohibit the production of tobacco smoke anywhere that a non-smoker might have to breathe it. |
I don't want to prohibit the sale of automobiles.
I just want to prohibit the production of carbon monoxide and other toxic compounds in vehicle exhaust anywhere that a pedestrian might have to breathe them.
But I digress... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
