# Wacky stuff I've heard about firearms



## Runs With Fire (Apr 23, 2018)

I have heard a few things lately that I thought were off .  It usually comes from martial arts instructors who "have done reasearch on using firearms" but either have limited experience and knowledge, or constantly blow things out of proportion.   
      I have heard that since all ranges require hearing protection, you don't really know the volume of the percussion from a gun, and percussion of a 9mm will be painfull and disorienting to the shooter.  I guess some people never went tromping  through the woods and just decided to shoot at something.  
  Next up, after firing a full magazine, the small barrel of a pistol  gets hot enough to burn you during a disarm.  Well, I suppose, if you have incredibly dainty hands and someone fires a Glock  with a 30 round magazine and you grab the toe of the barrel after hold open, maybey.  
    And this one:  the spent brass flies out of the chamber with enough force to hurt.  Why, his (my) 10mm hand cannon can take off a finger with spent brass.  
  Two more,   
The force of slide blowback on a semiautomatic pistol can injure your hand, rendering it useless in a fight.   I mean, I've seen scratches from slide bite, but that's all.  Nothing much. 
 And  I someone fires a large caliber pistol or a rifle or shotgun at you or too near you, the sound will stun you and break the eardrums.  Well, that .300 mag carbine with a two way horizontal muzzle brake level with my ears and three feet away was pretty loud, though not painful and I have had a 12 gauge fire barely over my head from 15-20 feet.  That's why you need to be careful while hunting.  We were in a cornfield, corn was a hand taller than me.  The top of the corn took shot.  Needless to say, I didn't hunt with him again on that trip.  Anyway it wasn't that bad, just ringing ears.  
       I don't think that I am just insensitive, half deaf, and brutish.  I do think that some people seem to think that guns are more powerful or more scary than they ever seemed to me. And please, if you're not a firearms expert, don't be the only firearms information some poor people will ever get.  Just make buddies with an expert and invite them to share wisdom.


----------



## Runs With Fire (Apr 23, 2018)

Btw, I'm no expert.  I'm just a redneck who is trying to be proficient and striving toward expertise. Edit: I think that just turned into my first rant.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Apr 23, 2018)

i understand what you are saying and im no expert so ill pose this as a question.
does where the firearm is discharged have influence on the percussive decibels?  
i would assume that a corn field would have a lower impact than in a block concrete range and these would be different than inside a residence and even more different than inside a vehicle.
i have heard a story where a police officer had a firearm discharge while fighting with an assailant within his vehicle and the sound was deafening and disorienting.
it is possible that people hear rare, extreme examples and apply them to all situations.  to those who are not familiar or comfortable (or even politically against) with firearms , they are deadly and very scary.


----------



## Flying Crane (Apr 23, 2018)

I was target shooting with a friend in a rock quarry, he fired his .30-30 rifle from about ten feet to my side while I was about even with the end of the muzzle.  The shockwave and sound felt like I was punched in the back.

This might have been different if we were in an open field instead of a semi-enclosed  quarry.  But yeah, under certain circumstances, it can be deafening and you can feel it.

Another time, as a child we were target shooting with our fathers.  My friends father fired a semi-auto .22, and the ejected cartridge flipped out and burned my friend’s arm.  So yeah, things can happen.  Maybe some stories are exaggerated, but things can happen.


----------



## Runs With Fire (Apr 23, 2018)

An enclosed area would make a big difference.  Is a cartridge, even if it were red hot, going to do anything worth complaining about if it just bounces off your arm.  I mean, it would leave a red spot, Mabry a tiny blister or scab, but what's that? I think most of this comes from the sort of people who make exaggerated complaints about everything.    Sure, shooting my mosin in the bedroom would be loud, but probably no louder than when I tried to make firecrackers.  DON'T EVER TRY AND MAKE FIRECRACKERS WITH BLACK POWDER!  #NOMOREEYEBROWS

I mean, I guess even if it is loud or gets hot/ burns a little, who cares?


----------



## Runs With Fire (Apr 23, 2018)

Mabry It's just because I'm a recheck and guns are just to dadblamed fun to ever complain about.


----------



## Flying Crane (Apr 23, 2018)

Runs With Fire said:


> An enclosed area would make a big difference.  Is a cartridge, even if it were red hot, going to do anything worth complaining about if it just bounces off your arm.  I mean, it would leave a red spot, Mabry a tiny blister or scab, but what's that? I think most of this comes from the sort of people who make exaggerated complaints about everything.    Sure, shooting my mosin in the bedroom would be loud, but probably no louder than when I tried to make firecrackers.  DON'T EVER TRY AND MAKE FIRECRACKERS WITH BLACK POWDER!  #NOMOREEYEBROWS
> 
> I mean, I guess even if it is loud or gets hot/ burns a little, who cares?


Well, my friend was burned enough to start crying, but we were probably 7 or so years old at the time.

I made plenty of firecrackers with pyrodex in my youth.  No bad mishaps, but there is a lot of potential there.


----------



## CB Jones (Apr 23, 2018)

Runs With Fire said:


> percussion from a gun, and percussion of a 9mm will be painfull and disorienting to the shooter.



Actually most of time the shooter never hears or notices the sound or percussion when in a shooting due to auditory exclusion.

I wouldn’t expect permanent damage to occur due to a shooting unless the muzzle was within 1 foot of someone’s ear.  Outside of that I would expect only temporary damage or discomfort.


----------



## Oni_Kadaki (Apr 23, 2018)

CB Jones said:


> Actually most of time the shooter never hears or notices the sound or percussion when in a shooting due to auditory exclusion.
> 
> I wouldn’t expect permanent damage to occur due to a shooting unless the muzzle was within 1 foot of someone’s ear.  Outside of that I would expect only temporary damage or discomfort.



This may be getting into the weeds, but caliber makes a huge different here. A 9mm fired off in close quarters a few times may make your ears hurt, but I doubt there will be significant long term damage. An AR-15, on the other hand, is loud. Really loud. Not to mention the flash and blast from the muzzle is considerable, especially from shorter barrels. That is actually one of the reasons I prefer pistols or pistol-caliber carbines for home defense despite the inferior ballistics.


----------



## Runs With Fire (Apr 23, 2018)

Oni_Kadaki said:


> This may be getting into the weeds, but caliber makes a huge different here. A 9mm fired off in close quarters a few times may make your ears hurt, but I doubt there will be significant long term damage. An AR-15, on the other hand, is loud. Really loud. Not to mention the flash and blast from the muzzle is considerable, especially from shorter barrels. That is actually one of the reasons I prefer pistols or pistol-caliber carbines for home defense despite the inferior ballistics.


Louder than a small pistol, but petsonally, I don't consider a .223 to be loud even with a 16 inch barrel, at least in comparison to other common hunting rifles.  Might be why I am biased. I am including in my experiance some guns a heck of alot louder and more powerfull than what alot of people are exposed to these days. I mean, a.223 isn't quiet, but it's no 30-06 or 7mag. A 10mm carbine would be sweet! But my wife just informed me of a sudden need to save a bit more money, another little one on the way. Woo hoo!


----------



## Danny T (Apr 23, 2018)

Oni_Kadaki said:


> This may be getting into the weeds, but caliber makes a huge different here. A 9mm fired off in close quarters a few times may make your ears hurt, but I doubt there will be significant long term damage. An AR-15, on the other hand, is loud. Really loud. Not to mention the flash and blast from the muzzle is considerable, especially from shorter barrels. That is actually one of the reasons I prefer pistols or pistol-caliber carbines for home defense despite the inferior ballistics.


A 9mm on discharge is rated at 159 dB. while a .223 is rated a 155 dB.
For reference; a .357 Magnum 164.3 dB while a Colt 45 ACP is 157dB.


----------



## Oni_Kadaki (Apr 23, 2018)

Danny T said:


> A 9mm on discharge is rated at 159 dB. while a .223 is rated a 155 dB.
> For reference; a .357 Magnum 164.3 dB while a Colt 45 ACP is 157dB.



Source? That doesn't match with my experience at all.

Also, Run With Fire, I am in no way arguing that a 5.56 is louder than a .30-06, but it's still plenty loud, especially from an SBR. Also, congrats on the new addition!


----------



## Runs With Fire (Apr 23, 2018)

Oni_Kadaki said:


> Source? That doesn't match with my experience at all.
> 
> Also, Run With Fire, I am in no way arguing that a 5.56 is louder than a .30-06, but it's still plenty loud, especially from an SBR. Also, congrats on the new addition!


Do you think the .223/5.56 is loud enough to hurt?


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 23, 2018)

CB Jones said:


> I wouldn’t expect permanent damage to occur due to a shooting unless the muzzle was within 1 foot of someone’s ear



My OH has high tone deafness  along with most of the British military. You can't wear ear defenders in war though the powers that be have come up recently with custom made for each person little bits of expensive plastic ( about a thousand quid a pair) that fit in the ears, not a lot of help though. My OH's is due not just to weapons (SLR, GPMG, mortars etc as well as 76 mm L23A1 gun on the Scorpions) but because he was in the RAF Regt, also the noise of aircraft. One squadron he was on looked after Harriers in the field, they'd take off feet away, straight up, impressive but noisy. Most of the time it was weapons though ( Falklands war, Northern Ireland, Oman).


----------



## CB Jones (Apr 23, 2018)

Tez3 said:


> My OH has high tone deafness  along with most of the British military. You can't wear ear defenders in war though the powers that be have come up recently with custom made for each person little bits of expensive plastic ( about a thousand quid a pair) that fit in the ears, not a lot of help though. My OH's is due not just to weapons (SLR, GPMG, mortars etc as well as 76 mm L23A1 gun on the Scorpions) but because he was in the RAF Regt, also the noise of aircraft. One squadron he was on looked after Harriers in the field, they'd take off feet away, straight up, impressive but noisy. Most of the time it was weapons though ( Falklands war, Northern Ireland, Oman).



Absolutely.  

I was talking about a single shooting event is not gonna cause permanent damage.


----------



## Oni_Kadaki (Apr 23, 2018)

Runs With Fire said:


> Do you think the .223/5.56 is loud enough to hurt?



I do, and again, especially from an SBR.


----------



## JR 137 (Apr 23, 2018)

Runs With Fire said:


> Do you think the .223/5.56 is loud enough to hurt?


If an AR-15 is .233, yes, it’s loud enough to hurt.  We were at an outdoor gun range, and my idiot cousin decided to start shooting while I was about an arm’s length away from the barrel of the AR-15.  I didn’t get a chance to put my ear plugs in.  It wasn’t disorienting, but it was quite loud and painful enough.  It was before noon, and my ears were still ringing when I went to sleep.  I was 15.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Apr 23, 2018)

Runs With Fire said:


> I have heard that since all ranges require hearing protection, you don't really know the volume of the percussion from a gun, and percussion of a 9mm will be painfull and disorienting to the shooter.  I guess some people never went tromping  through the woods and just decided to shoot at something.



Firing without ear protection will (assuming we're not talking about a .22 riffle here...) make your ears ring, and can lead to hearing loss. Painful? Meh. I doubt it.



> Next up, after firing a full magazine, the small barrel of a pistol  gets hot enough to burn you during a disarm.  Well, I suppose, if you have incredibly dainty hands and someone fires a Glock  with a 30 round magazine and you grab the toe of the barrel after hold open, maybey.



Depends... obviously you don't generally grab the barrel, and the slide  certainly isn't going to be hot. However, when I'm shooting my suppressed Glock 41, it doesn't take very many magazines before the suppressor is too hot to touch comfortably (and suppressors do require tightening).



> And this one:  the spent brass flies out of the chamber with enough force to hurt.  Why, his (my) 10mm hand cannon can take off a finger with spent brass.



Clearly nonsense.



> The force of slide blowback on a semiautomatic pistol can injure your hand, rendering it useless in a fight.   I mean, I've seen scratches from slide bite, but that's all.  Nothing much.
> And  I someone fires a large caliber pistol or a rifle or shotgun at you or too near you, the sound will stun you and break the eardrums.



Rampant silliness.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 24, 2018)

CB Jones said:


> Absolutely.
> 
> I was talking about a single shooting event is not gonna cause permanent damage.




And there's also that 'husband deafness' when you are telling him something you need doing!


----------



## Runs With Fire (Apr 24, 2018)

JR 137 said:


> If an AR-15 is .233, yes, it’s loud enough to hurt.  We were at an outdoor gun range, and my idiot cousin decided to start shooting while I was about an arm’s length away from the barrel of the AR-15.  I didn’t get a chance to put my ear plugs in.  It wasn’t disorienting, but it was quite loud and painful enough.  It was before noon, and my ears were still ringing when I went to sleep.  I was 15.


The standard ar15  and simular fifles are 5.56mm, which is functionally a .223 Remington.  If I remember right,  5.56 is loaded a smidge lower pressure and the brass is a tad thinner.  However, depending on how tight the tolorace of the chamber and throat, they both fire and cycle well to fine in each other.  The 5.56 does better in .223 tham vice versa.


----------



## JR 137 (Apr 24, 2018)

Runs With Fire said:


> The standard ar15  and simular fifles are 5.56mm, which is functionally a .223 Remington.  If I remember right,  5.56 is loaded a smidge lower pressure and the brass is a tad thinner.  However, depending on how tight the tolorace of the chamber and throat, they both fire and cycle well to fine in each other.  The 5.56 does better in .223 tham vice versa.


If I’m not mistaken, the AR-15 can shoot 2 different bullets.  I think NATO issue (which is the rifle I was referring to) can shot both, whereas other variants can’t.

Either way, it was pretty loud.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 24, 2018)

JR 137 said:


> If I’m not mistaken, the AR-15 can shoot 2 different bullets. I think NATO issue (which is the rifle I was referring to) can shot both, whereas other variants can’t.




My OH agrees with you......


----------



## Runs With Fire (Apr 24, 2018)

JR 137 said:


> If I’m not mistaken, the AR-15 can shoot 2 different bullets.  I think NATO issue (which is the rifle I was referring to) can shot both, whereas other variants can’t.
> 
> Either way, it was pretty loud.


The 5.56 is the nato standard.  In a fine built 5.56 precision rifle with tight tolorance, the .223 shouldn't cycle well as it is a tad tight.  In a military battle rifle  the tolorance better not be tight. Both should work fine.  In a gun chambered to .223 specs both work fine.  So usually, they both work just fine. Same thing with 7.62 vs .308 win 
EDIT: I think. I will have to check my books when I get home.


----------



## Runs With Fire (Apr 24, 2018)

Tez3 said:


> My OH agrees with you......


What is an OH?


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 24, 2018)

Runs With Fire said:


> What is an OH?




Other Half or if you live in Yorkshire T'other arf. 

other half | Definition of other half in English by Oxford Dictionaries


----------



## Danny T (Apr 24, 2018)

Runs With Fire said:


> What is an OH?


'Other Half'
Comes from a time when 2 people actually committed their lives to each other, married and the two became as one. Hence 1 half and the Other Half.


Oni_Kadaki said:


> Source? That doesn't match with my experience at all.
> 
> Also, Run With Fire, I am in no way arguing that a 5.56 is louder than a .30-06, but it's still plenty loud, especially from an SBR. Also, congrats on the new addition!



Peak dB SPL of Various Firearms and Ammunitions
Data from: “Auditory Risk to Unprotected Bystanders Exposed to Firearm Noise.”
Journal of the American Academy of Audiology 2011.
Data from The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
“Assessment of Noise Exposure for Indoor and Outdoor Firing Ranges.” 2007.
Data from: “Estimates of auditory risk from Outdoor Impulse Noise II; Civilian Firearms.” Noise & Health Journal, 2009.
Data from: ”Comparison of Impulse Noise levels Generated by Firearms
Presented at 11th International Congress on Noise as a Public Health Problem (ICBEN) 2011, London, UK.  
Data from: “Auditory Risk Estimates for Youth Target Shooting.”  International Journal of Audiology, 2014.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 24, 2018)

Danny T said:


> Comes from a time when 2 people actually committed their lives to each other, married and the two became as one. Hence 1 half and the Other Half.



Forty three years for us, through wars (real ones) we've both been in and some tricky peace times too.


----------



## Danny T (Apr 24, 2018)

Tez3 said:


> Forty three years for us, through wars (real ones) we've both been in and some tricky peace times too.


That is awesome Tez. Congratulations.
Jacquie and I are 40 years.


----------



## CB Jones (Apr 24, 2018)

Tez3 said:


> And there's also that 'husband deafness' when you are telling him something you need doing!



A real phenomenon!


----------



## Runs With Fire (Apr 24, 2018)

I clock in at just over a year and a half.


----------



## jobo (Apr 24, 2018)

My view of fire arms is that any one who wants rather than needs a killing machine is mentally unsuitable to have one, wanting to storm round the forest killing various mammals is not a good excuse for having one..

Once they bring that in a lot of the problems will be solved


----------



## JR 137 (Apr 24, 2018)

Tez3 said:


> And there's also that 'husband deafness' when you are telling him something you need doing!


There also that, I don’t know exactly what to call it, wife “I don’t know how to-ness” when they don’t feel like doing something.  My wife likes to act like she doesn’t know how to do certain things.  She’s right, in a sense; it’s more that she refuses to learn how to do those things.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 24, 2018)

JR 137 said:


> There also that, I don’t know exactly what to call it, wife “I don’t know how to-ness” when they don’t feel like doing something.  My wife likes to act like she doesn’t know how to do certain things.  She’s right, in a sense; it’s more that she refuses to learn how to do those things.




With being a military wife ( as well as being ex military myself) there's little I can't do as if I didn't do it then it wouldn't be done. You can't wait months until he's home from deployment.


----------



## Hanshi (Apr 24, 2018)

Martial arts instructors are not alone in spreading ignorance concerning firearms.  I was a cop for 9 years and taught firearms at the police academy.  In the excitement of a stressful moment, most people either don't hear the shot or merely remember it as a distant "pop".  Any hunter knows when you get a shot at a deer, you're usually not aware of sound of a discharge.  And while the barrel/cylinder gap on a revolver will cut (maybe severely) a hand cupped over it, it takes much more than a cylinder or magazine of shots to make the firearm any more than simply "noticeably warm".  

In an inclosed space such as a car, the sound of a discharge _might _ be uncomfortable depending on the situation.  Talking about concussion, I shoot a lot of black powder (muzzleloaders) guns.  A cap and ball black powder pistol going off in an enclosed space IS painful.


----------



## Oni_Kadaki (Apr 24, 2018)

Danny, I appreciate you citing your source. Just to check my own sanity I talked to one of my classmates (Air Force Security Forces Academy), who is a civilian SWAT officer, today about this very question. While he did not necessarily agree that 5.56mm is louder than 9mm, he did agree that it is much more uncomfortable to fire off without ear protection, particularly in close quarters. I interpret this to mean that even if 5.56mm is not necessarily louder, it produces greater blast and flash.


----------



## Danny T (Apr 24, 2018)

Oni_Kadaki said:


> I interpret this to mean that even if 5.56mm is not necessarily louder, it produces greater blast and flash.


This I agree with. Especially in a confined space.


----------



## pdg (Apr 25, 2018)

jobo said:


> My view of fire arms is that any one who wants rather than needs a killing machine is mentally unsuitable to have one, wanting to storm round the forest killing various mammals is not a good excuse for having one..



Well, that should really depend on whether you view them purely as a killing machine...

I like target shooting, so for me it's a machine for killing paper.

I have a bow, it's good at killing straw bundles (it'd be just as effective against a mammal too). Archery does sound posher than shooting.

I also have a crossbow, see above.

Knives too, got a few of those for different purposes. They're quite sharp and pointy.

I study how to overcome other people and how to cause them pain and damage. I call it "martial arts"...


Oh, and I have a car - it'd make a fantastic bludgeoning weapon.

So, want or need?

Why would a civilian _need_ a firearm/projectile weapon/cutting weapon/bludgeon? Self defence in this instance can't count, because that being a "need" is debatable and it becomes a "wanted killing machine" as soon as the intention is to use it against another.

So, why _want_ one? There are more reasons to want one other than to kill stuff.


----------



## jobo (Apr 25, 2018)

pdg said:


> Well, that should really depend on whether you view them purely as a killing machine...
> 
> I like target shooting, so for me it's a machine for killing paper.
> 
> ...





pdg said:


> Well, that should really depend on whether you view them purely as a killing machine...
> 
> I like target shooting, so for me it's a machine for killing paper.
> 
> ...


Well GUNs have no other purpose than to kill things, if your shooting TARkets ,your practising killing things. It's rather the same with your Bow  and crossbow to be honest, if you want to show of your hand eye coordination, play snooker or darts, or if you want something pOSHer, play croquet,

Look at it this way, if someone spent their Sunday afternoon practising hitting People shaped tarkets with their car, you might suspect them of being unsuitable to own a car


----------



## Runs With Fire (Apr 25, 2018)

jobo said:


> Well GUNs have no other purpose than to kill things, if your shooting TARkets ,your practising killing things. It's rather the same with your Bow  and crossbow to be honest, if you want to show of your hand eye coordination, play snooker or darts, or if you want something pOSHer, play croquet,
> 
> Look at it this way, if someone spent their Sunday afternoon practising hitting People shaped tarkets with their car, you might suspect them of being unsuitable to own a car


I'm not intetested in a heated discussion.

Most folks I have see target shoot didn't ise person shapped ones.  I've shot more pop cans and baseballs than paper targets.  In my martial arts, firearm trainig is in the curriculem.  The purpose of my martial arts is to be able to end any threat against myself or others. A firearm gives people the option to call the bet if a threat raises the stakes.  
It is a requirement in my training that I own a handgun and apply and attain a Concealed Pistol License (if legal) in my training.  
I believe I have much different views than you in margial arts. 
        My philosohpy of martial arts is as follows:  to be able to asess a threat and apply necesary force within the Use Of Force Continueum.  Use Of Force Continueum:  Controll-Incapacitate-Terminate.  It basically means apply pain, knock out, kill.  So trairing to kill quickly and efficiently is part of my martial art AKA military training.


----------



## pdg (Apr 25, 2018)

jobo said:


> Well GUNs have no other purpose than to kill things, if your shooting TARkets ,your practising killing things. It's rather the same with your Bow  and crossbow to be honest, if you want to show of your hand eye coordination, play snooker or darts, or if you want something pOSHer, play croquet,
> 
> Look at it this way, if someone spent their Sunday afternoon practising hitting People shaped tarkets with their car, you might suspect them of being unsuitable to own a car



And how is doing drills against a BOB or similar any different?

That's person shaped, and it's sole purpose is to practice hitting something person shaped. You don't do it to practice tickling.



If I'm shooting targets, I'm practicing to shoot targets better and more consistently. My targets aren't even shaped like any sort of creature (except maybe a jellyfish viewed from above). I have no intention to turn that weapon against a living being for fun.

In a survival situation I could admittedly turn that practiced skill around and use it for hunting and/or defence - and it might help me do better than someone who can't/won't shoot/loose.

If anything, my shooting could be considered less of an aggressive hobby than my MA practice, where I do practice hitting people.


----------



## pdg (Apr 25, 2018)

Runs With Fire said:


> I'm not intetested in a heated discussion.



In all fairness, you titled the thread "wacky stuff about firearms" and the attitude of "anyone who wants a gun is mentally unfit to have one" definitely falls into the wacky realm


----------



## jobo (Apr 25, 2018)

pdg said:


> And how is doing drills against a BOB or similar any different?
> 
> That's person shaped, and it's sole purpose is to practice hitting something person shaped. You don't do it to practice tickling.
> 
> ...



Well the purpose of kicking a Bob sn't generally to Practise KILLIng someone ,youR hands and feet have other purposes that causing PAIn or death. To be clear it's the gun i object to nOt o the target, I couldn't, to follow your example ,SUGgest that all hands and feet were confiscated. To BE  honest I always thoughT havIng a person model target for ma is more than a bit odd, You never seen a boxer training on one, so they seemingly don't offer much of an advantage over a heavy bag, it's clearly some sort of fantasy thing like a sex doll


----------



## jobo (Apr 25, 2018)

Runs With Fire said:


> I'm not intetested in a heated discussion.
> 
> Most folks I have see target shoot didn't ise person shapped ones.  I've shot more pop cans and baseballs than paper targets.  In my martial arts, firearm trainig is in the curriculem.  The purpose of my martial arts is to be able to end any threat against myself or others. A firearm gives people the option to call the bet if a threat raises the stakes.
> It is a requirement in my training that I own a handgun and apply and attain a Concealed Pistol License (if legal) in my training.
> ...


Why shoot pop cans, they are generally harmless, unless you are practising to shoot a living thing!


----------



## jobo (Apr 25, 2018)

pdg said:


> In all fairness, you titled the thread "wacky stuff about firearms" and the attitude of "anyone who wants a gun is mentally unfit to have one" definitely falls into the wacky realm


Exactly, he wanted views that agreed with his


----------



## jobo (Apr 25, 2018)

Runs With Fire said:


> I'm not intetested in a heated discussion.
> 
> Most folks I have see target shoot didn't ise person shapped ones.  I've shot more pop cans and baseballs than paper targets.  In my martial arts, firearm trainig is in the curriculem.  The purpose of my martial arts is to be able to end any threat against myself or others. A firearm gives people the option to call the bet if a threat raises the stakes.
> It is a requirement in my training that I own a handgun and apply and attain a Concealed Pistol License (if legal) in my training.
> ...


I'm confused here,are you in the military or not, the army needs GUNs and they have to practise killing people, I'm ok with that. Or are you pretending your in the military and doing military type training ( IE practising killing people)for no other reason than it makes You Feel good . Coz that is odd, all that weekend warrior stuff , crawling round the woods playing war games like a 10 year old


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 25, 2018)

Runs With Fire said:


> I guess some people never went tromping through the woods and just decided to shoot at something.




While we're at it, I've never met or known anyone to do this. I've known people set up targets, cans, etc but never just bimble around shooting 'things'.


----------



## pdg (Apr 25, 2018)

jobo said:


> Well the purpose of kicking a Bob sn't generally to Practise KILLIng someone ,youR hands and feet have other purposes that causing PAIn or death. To be clear it's the gun i object to nOt o the target, I couldn't, to follow your example ,SUGgest that all hands and feet were confiscated. To BE  honest I always thoughT havIng a person model target for ma is more than a bit odd, You never seen a boxer training on one, so they seemingly don't offer much of an advantage over a heavy bag, it's clearly some sort of fantasy thing like a sex doll



Arguably, the very vast majority of martial arts are designed to cause pain, injury or death - so while you wouldn't confiscate hands or feet how can you possibly condone practicing using them in such a fashion?

Btw, you can't use practicing for sparring as an answer - sparring is practice for fighting. 

There's possibly a bit of the sex doll thing for some people, but there's also a difference in the targets boxers use compared to some other arts.

A boxer won't be interested in aiming downwards at the clavicle for instance.

Shape of the target aside, a heavy bag (or any bag/ball/pad) is supposed to represent part of a person...


So, what about a sword (seeing as you completely ignored knives)?

A sword has no other purpose than to kill or maim a person, you wouldn't carry one just in case your shoelaces knotted too hard...

So, is fencing a sign of a murderous mental intent and anyone who wants a sword is mentally unfit to have one?



Oh, and the army/police/security don't _need_ guns either btw - there are non-lethal alternatives or y'know, we could all just get along...


----------



## Runs With Fire (Apr 25, 2018)

jobo said:


> Why shoot pop cans, they are generally harmless, unless you are practising to shoot a living thing!


It's a ton of fun!


----------



## jobo (Apr 25, 2018)

pdg said:


> Arguably, the very vast majority of martial arts are designed to cause pain, injury or death - so while you wouldn't confiscate hands or feet how can you possibly condone practicing using them in such a fashion?
> 
> Btw, you can't use practicing for sparring as an answer - sparring is practice for fighting.
> 
> ...


Well first I'm glad we agree about swords,

But then your building a,strawman, if two people want to fight, in a ring, a dojo or on the street corner in good with that if one of them gets kicked to death etal, I'm less so.

From my perspective, IF it's  me in a fight,  a) I'm less likely to get hurt and b) the person I'm fighting is less likely to get badly hurt if I can easily subdue him, as a have control about how much and where he gets damaged,

A gun has only one mode, max  damage to what ever part of the body you hit my punch has infinite levels of power, belowmaximum


----------



## Runs With Fire (Apr 25, 2018)

jobo said:


> Exactly, he wanted views that agreed with his


I don't mind discussion, but I won't participate in a heated argument. Besides, only wives win arguments.


----------



## pdg (Apr 25, 2018)

jobo said:


> A gun has only one mode, max damage to what ever part of the body you hit



But why does it have to hit a part of the body?

Why does it have to be aimed at a body at all?

I've discharged thousands of rounds through many guns over the years, not once has it been with the intention of harming a person.


Oh, and by the way, "max damage" isn't the sole mode of a gun, depending on the projectile it can range from "a bit of a bruise" all the way through to "oh my god, he's got a leg off".

Oh, and which part of this fabled strawman is made from paintballers?


----------



## jobo (Apr 25, 2018)

Runs With Fire said:


> I don't mind discussion, but I won't participate in a heated argument. Besides, only wives win arguments.


Well don't argue and don't get heated then, self control, you control your own destiny in this thread as you do in life Generally, grasshopper


----------



## jobo (Apr 25, 2018)

pdg said:


> But why does it have to hit a part of the body?
> 
> Why does it have to be aimed at a body at all?
> 
> ...


Fire arms do not cause a bit of a bruse, paintball guns are not fire arms,Any more than a grease gun is. plus they can cause serious injury .

Well two thoughts, why are you spending countless hours of your life practising something they you never intend to do, and b) no matter what you claim that amount of practise means you are gun obesesed, and that's the very people who shouldn't have them


----------



## Runs With Fire (Apr 25, 2018)

Tez3 said:


> While we're at it, I've never met or known anyone to do this. I've known people set up targets, cans, etc but never just bimble around shooting 'things'.


It's a redneck thing.  Camping last month,  we decided to string up a coffee can in the trees and have a contest.


----------



## Runs With Fire (Apr 25, 2018)

jobo said:


> I'm confused here,are you in the military or not, the army needs GUNs and they have to practise killing people, I'm ok with that. Or are you pretending your in the military and doing military type training ( IE practising killing people)for no other reason than it makes You Feel good . Coz that is odd, all that weekend warrior stuff , crawling round the woods playing war games like a 10 year old


I am a civilian.  However as a citizen, I have the responsability of protecting myself, my family, my comunity, and my country if need arises.  I learned in my constitution and government class in high school, that militia is the sum of military force in a given nation, and that the citizenry make up the greatest portion of that potential force.  It is intetesting to see the difference in cultutre here.  I am not a member of a local militia (there are several), but I don't mind most of those guys either.


----------



## jobo (Apr 25, 2018)

Runs With Fire said:


> I am a civilian.  However as a citizen, I have the responsability of protecting myself, my family, my comunity, and my country if need arises.  I learned in my constitution and government class in high school, that militia is the sum of military force in a given nation, and that the citizenry make up the greatest portion of that potential force.  It is intetesting to see the difference in cultutre here.  I am not a member of a local militia (there are several), but I don't mind most of those guys either.


Right so your walking about killing random mammals And coKE  tins,as it's you patriotic duty, now I've heard everything

I was of the opinion that the U.S. Had quite a lot of actual soldiers, when are you envisioning having to defend your country,?


----------



## Runs With Fire (Apr 25, 2018)

jobo said:


> Right so your walking about killing random mammals And coKE  tins,as it's you patriotic duty, now I've heard everything
> 
> I was of the opinion that the U.S. Had quite a lot of actual soldiers, when are you envisioning having to defend your country,?


I don't envision it.  I fear it.  Not since Vietmamn had the citizenry been called to serve. And not since long before have they fought on the homeland.


----------



## CB Jones (Apr 25, 2018)

Our country is founded on the belief of inalienable rights including armed protection of yourself and others.

But that is a discussion for another board


----------



## pdg (Apr 25, 2018)

jobo said:


> Fire arms do not cause a bit of a bruse, paintball guns are not fire arms,Any more than a grease gun is. plus they can cause serious injury .



Erm, never heard of rubber bullets, as used in crowd control? They bruise, and they're ejected from a firearm.

A paintbal gun's sole purpose is to pretend to be a firearm and be fired toward a person, pretending to kill them. I can't say the same about a grease gun.

Btw, I could cause a serious injury with my grease gun...



jobo said:


> Well two thoughts, why are you spending countless hours of your life practising something they you never intend to do, and b) no matter what you claim that amount of practise means you are gun obesesed, and that's the very people who shouldn't have them



I practice shooting targets, because shooting targets is what I intend to do - why is it so hard for you to understand that not everyone who fires a gun wants to kill someone or something?

As for countless hours, well that's just pathetic. I've spent more time watching cartoons.

No matter what you claim, by training in a martial art (unless you practice some sort of no touch nonsense) you're practicing to use your own body in a more hostile fashion than I practice using a firearm.

Ergo, your argument has no merit.


----------



## jobo (Apr 25, 2018)

Runs With Fire said:


> I don't envision it.  I fear it.  Not since Vietmamn had the citizenry been called to serve. And not since long before have they fought on the homeland.


Did they have to take their own guns to nam?


----------



## Runs With Fire (Apr 25, 2018)

jobo said:


> Did they have to take their own guns to nam?


Sure helped if they knew what they were doin


----------



## jobo (Apr 25, 2018)

pdg said:


> Erm, never heard of rubber bullets, as used in crowd control? They bruise, and they're ejected from a firearm.
> 
> A paintbal gun's sole purpose is to pretend to be a firearm and be fired toward a person, pretending to kill them. I can't say the same about a grease gun.
> 
> ...


Rubber bullets don't cause slight brusing, and your not Firing rubber bullets are you, so it seems to have no bearing? Shooting things and watching cartoons  Hmm are the two connected in someway i wonder


----------



## jobo (Apr 25, 2018)

Runs With Fire said:


> Sure helped if they knew what they were doin


I thought there Kit  bag was full of pills, it's little wonder they couldn't hit anything


----------



## jobo (Apr 25, 2018)

pdg said:


> Erm, never heard of rubber bullets, as used in crowd control? They bruise, and they're ejected from a firearm.
> 
> A paintbal gun's sole purpose is to pretend to be a firearm and be fired toward a person, pretending to kill them. I can't say the same about a grease gun.
> 
> ...


Your actually making a good case to ban paintball here


----------



## pdg (Apr 25, 2018)

jobo said:


> Your actually making a good case to ban paintball here



Well, let's face it - it's much much more like play murder than wanting to hold a 1" group at 300yds.


----------



## Hanshi (Apr 25, 2018)

It's fact that a gun, knife, sword, stick or a rock is just a THING; and a "thing" can have NO PURPOSE; only THE PERSON can exibit "purpose".  A "thing" can only have a *function* and never exibit purpose.  A gun, knife or a slingshot are "things" and a "thing" is an inanimate object unlike a person.  An object will not move, convince one to do evil or anything else except just remain where it's placed.  It will only move if one picks it up and transfers it from one place to another; i.e. the purpose is totally up to the human.  It is rather scary for anyone to demonize a thing be it a car, gun, bottle of whiskey; what about a house and will it stop there?  

My advice has always been that if one dislikes something, one should stay away from it.  I use to be a cop and was required to carry a handgun.  I like guns; and since I love history, I own a few flintlock longrifles - 17th and 18th technology.  I'm pretty sure cops no longer need to be armed due to the, previously mention, non-lethal devices in widespread use.  I recommend getting familiar with "prior restrant", which means punishing, jailing or denying somethig to a person who alledgedly _MIGHT _do or acquire something the rulers considered "bad".


----------



## Buka (Apr 25, 2018)

Hanshi said:


> It's fact that a gun, knife, sword, stick or a rock is just a THING; and a "thing" can have NO PURPOSE; only THE PERSON can exibit "purpose".  A "thing" can only have a *function* and never exibit purpose.  A gun, knife or a slingshot are "things" and a "thing" is an inanimate object unlike a person.  An object will not move, convince one to do evil or anything else except just remain where it's placed.  It will only move if one picks it up and transfers it from one place to another; i.e. the purpose is totally up to the human.  It is rather scary for anyone to demonize a thing be it a car, gun, bottle of whiskey; what about a house and will it stop there?
> 
> My advice has always been that if one dislikes something, one should stay away from it.  I use to be a cop and was required to carry a handgun.  I like guns; and since I love history, I own a few flintlock longrifles - 17th and 18th technology.  I'm pretty sure cops no longer need to be armed due to the, previously mention, non-lethal devices in widespread use.  I recommend getting familiar with "prior restrant", which means punishing, jailing or denying somethig to a person who alledgedly _MIGHT _do or acquire something the rulers considered "bad".



You're pretty sure cops no longer need to be armed? For real?

And I have the sneaky suspicion this thread is not long for this world. Probably a good thing.


----------



## Buka (Apr 25, 2018)

Tez3 said:


> Forty three years for us, through wars (real ones) we've both been in and some tricky peace times too.





Danny T said:


> That is awesome Tez. Congratulations.
> Jacquie and I are 40 years.



That's awesome guys. I've been married for for thirty one, but we dated for nine years before that.

And I'm quite sure that when I'm on my death bed she'll say.... 
"Is _that_ what you're going to wear?"


----------



## jobo (Apr 25, 2018)

Hanshi said:


> It's fact that a gun, knife, sword, stick or a rock is just a THING; and a "thing" can have NO PURPOSE; only THE PERSON can exibit "purpose".  A "thing" can only have a *function* and never exibit purpose.  A gun, knife or a slingshot are "things" and a "thing" is an inanimate object unlike a person.  An object will not move, convince one to do evil or anything else except just remain where it's placed.  It will only move if one picks it up and transfers it from one place to another; i.e. the purpose is totally up to the human.  It is rather scary for anyone to demonize a thing be it a car, gun, bottle of whiskey; what about a house and will it stop there?
> 
> My advice has always been that if one dislikes something, one should stay away from it.  I use to be a cop and was required to carry a handgun.  I like guns; and since I love history, I own a few flintlock longrifles - 17th and 18th technology.  I'm pretty sure cops no longer need to be armed due to the, previously mention, non-lethal devices in widespread use.  I recommend getting familiar with "prior restrant", which means punishing, jailing or denying somethig to a person who alledgedly _MIGHT _do or acquire something the rulers considered "bad".


That's complete nonsence, people design things for a purpose, and that intent can make an object intrinsically bad, hollow point bullets, land mines Agent orange, napam And  and GUNs to name but a few


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 25, 2018)

pdg said:


> Erm, never heard of rubber bullets, as used in crowd control? They bruise, and they're ejected from a firearm.



Correctly known as baton rounds, they fired from a weapon not 'ejected', there's plastic and rubber ones. We used them in Northern Ireland. They can kill.


----------



## CB Jones (Apr 25, 2018)

Tez3 said:


> They can kill.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 25, 2018)

Flying Crane said:


> I was target shooting with a friend in a rock quarry, he fired his .30-30 rifle from about ten feet to my side while I was about even with the end of the muzzle.  The shockwave and sound felt like I was punched in the back.
> 
> This might have been different if we were in an open field instead of a semi-enclosed  quarry.  But yeah, under certain circumstances, it can be deafening and you can feel it.
> 
> Another time, as a child we were target shooting with our fathers.  My friends father fired a semi-auto .22, and the ejected cartridge flipped out and burned my friend’s arm.  So yeah, things can happen.  Maybe some stories are exaggerated, but things can happen.


I've gotten burned many times by flying brass. Had more than one go down my shirt, one somehow slipped up a sleeve (never did figure that out). They can definitely burn slightly (though I can't imagine that'd be enough to even be felt under adrenaline rush). I'm trying to imagine that from the .30-30, and would love to actually feel it (with hearing protection - my right ear already kind of sucks).


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 25, 2018)

Runs With Fire said:


> Louder than a small pistol, but petsonally, I don't consider a .223 to be loud even with a 16 inch barrel, at least in comparison to other common hunting rifles.  Might be why I am biased. I am including in my experiance some guns a heck of alot louder and more powerfull than what alot of people are exposed to these days. I mean, a.223 isn't quiet, but it's no 30-06 or 7mag. A 10mm carbine would be sweet! But my wife just informed me of a sudden need to save a bit more money, another little one on the way. Woo hoo!


Hey, congratulations!


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 25, 2018)

Danny T said:


> A 9mm on discharge is rated at 159 dB. while a .223 is rated a 155 dB.
> For reference; a .357 Magnum 164.3 dB while a Colt 45 ACP is 157dB.


For context +10dB represents about a doubling in perceived volume, so teh .357 mag. is about twice as loud as the .223. Of course, there are other factors. Most folks perceive the boom of a .45 as "bigger" than that of a .9mm, so will think it is louder.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 25, 2018)

Tez3 said:


> And there's also that 'husband deafness' when you are telling him something you need doing!


Huh?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 25, 2018)

Oni_Kadaki said:


> Danny, I appreciate you citing your source. Just to check my own sanity I talked to one of my classmates (Air Force Security Forces Academy), who is a civilian SWAT officer, today about this very question. While he did not necessarily agree that 5.56mm is louder than 9mm, he did agree that it is much more uncomfortable to fire off without ear protection, particularly in close quarters. I interpret this to mean that even if 5.56mm is not necessarily louder, it produces greater blast and flash.


The frequency range involved can also affect how we perceive the volume, which won't show up in those simple numbers.


----------



## jobo (Apr 25, 2018)

Tez3 said:


> Correctly known as baton rounds, they fired from a weapon not 'ejected', there's plastic and rubber ones. We used them in Northern Ireland. They can kill.





gpseymour said:


> For context +10dB represents about a doubling in perceived volume, so teh .357 mag. is about twice as loud as the .223. Of course, there are other factors. Most folks perceive the boom of a .45 as "bigger" than that of a .9mm, so will think it is louder.


Technical correction 3 Db is a doubling of perceived volume, So ten is doubled and doubled and doubled again plus a third if another double


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 25, 2018)

jobo said:


> Well GUNs have no other purpose than to kill things, if your shooting TARkets ,your practising killing things. It's rather the same with your Bow  and crossbow to be honest, if you want to show of your hand eye coordination, play snooker or darts, or if you want something pOSHer, play croquet,
> 
> Look at it this way, if someone spent their Sunday afternoon practising hitting People shaped tarkets with their car, you might suspect them of being unsuitable to own a car


So, people who enjoy target shooting have some unmet need to kill, of which they are not aware?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 25, 2018)

jobo said:


> Technical correction 3 Db is a doubling of perceived volume, So ten is doubled and doubled and doubled again plus a third if another double


10dB is for loudness. 3dB is sound intensity. Either is possibly correct, which is more than a bit odd, but sound is like that.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 25, 2018)

jobo said:


> Why shoot pop cans, they are generally harmless, unless you are practising to shoot a living thing!


Well, if you want to get good at shooting pop bottles, there's very little that simulates that as well as shooting a pop bottle. Your premise assumes the intention is to protect from harm ("they are generally harmless"). Not everyone who uses a gun is practicing using it for its admittedly original function.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 25, 2018)

Tez3 said:


> While we're at it, I've never met or known anyone to do this. I've known people set up targets, cans, etc but never just bimble around shooting 'things'.


I've heard some hunters (I've never hunted) talk about getting bored when the hunt isn't "going well", and finding targets to shoot at.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 25, 2018)

pdg said:


> Btw, you can't use practicing for sparring as an answer - sparring is practice for fighting.


Just as it's possible for someone to practice firearms just to practice hitting inanimate targets, it's also possible to practice sparring for the sake of sparring.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 25, 2018)

jobo said:


> they can cause serious injury


So can a whisky glass. What's your point?


----------



## Runs With Fire (Apr 25, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Hey, congratulations!


well thanks. I wanted to buy cigars but I'm not supposed to smoke anymore.  It seemed to have a nasry effect on my health condition.


----------



## Buka (Apr 25, 2018)

What this country needs is more guns. We should sell them in vending machines.

Think of the time that would save.


----------



## pdg (Apr 26, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Just as it's possible for someone to practice firearms just to practice hitting inanimate targets, it's also possible to practice sparring for the sake of sparring.



But you can't sensibly use "sparring as practice for sparring" while absolutely discounting that someone could "shoot targets as practice for shooting targets".

I spar so I get better at sparring, I have no intention of fighting as it holds no appeal.

I also shoot targets so I get better at shooting targets, I have no intention of killing with a gun as it holds no appeal.


If anyone has a sound reason as to why the latter statement makes me mentally unsound but the former doesn't I'd love to hear it.


----------



## pdg (Apr 26, 2018)

Tez3 said:


> Correctly known as baton rounds, they fired from a weapon not 'ejected', there's plastic and rubber ones. We used them in Northern Ireland. They can kill.



Popularly known as "rubber bullets" in the media, which is a more known phrase the 'average' person is more likely to have heard. Had I used the term FBR or PBR probably about 7 people on here would've understood within context.

I should have used the word "propelled", the casing is ejected - my mistake.

They can kill, so can a single drunken punch. Neither of those things are necessarily intended to do so though, so the statement "guns only have one mode, maximum damage" is akin to saying the same about a punch.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 26, 2018)

pdg said:


> Popularly known as "rubber bullets" in the media, which is a more known phrase the 'average' person is more likely to have heard. Had I used the term FBR or PBR probably about 7 people on here would've understood within context.
> 
> I should have used the word "propelled", the casing is ejected - my mistake.
> 
> They can kill, so can a single drunken punch. Neither of those things are necessarily intended to do so though, so the statement "guns only have one mode, maximum damage" is akin to saying the same about a punch.




You are on a thread where people actually know about weapons, don't insult them by using phrases from the media, they prefer the proper names.

They can be used to kill deliberately not accidently.


----------



## pdg (Apr 26, 2018)

Tez3 said:


> You are on a thread where people actually know about weapons, don't insult them by using phrases from the media, they prefer the proper names.



But, the person who I aimed the comment at probably wouldn't have understood. Then, you would have blamed me for being deliberately confusing. Somewhat like "you can't expect everyone to know that"...

There's just no middle ground is there?



Tez3 said:


> They can be used to kill deliberately not accidently.



So can a spoon.

I was taught to use a spoon before I could walk, I suppose my parents were getting some death-kill-destroy training in early and setting me up to be a mentally maladjusted gun worshipping paper target murderer.


----------



## Runs With Fire (Apr 26, 2018)

Buka said:


> What this country needs is more guns. We should sell them in vending machines.
> 
> Think of the time that would save.


Think of the the scene when it gets jammed.  It'd be a heck of alot worse than not getting my barbeque tater chips.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 26, 2018)

pdg said:


> But, the person who I aimed the comment at probably wouldn't have understood. Then, you would have blamed me for being deliberately confusing. Somewhat like "you can't expect everyone to know that"...
> 
> There's just no middle ground is there?
> 
> ...



You are saying he's too stupid to know what you were talking about unless you phrased in a simplistic way. You can also stop jumping to conclusions about what _you think_ I would have said. You seem to enjoy pretending o be misunderstood but it's wearing off and we can see the pot stirrer behind it all.

Spoons are not made with the intent of hurting, maiming or killing someone, baton rounds are and if used in a certain way will likely kill someone so your faux naïf comment comes across as pointless and smart aleck-ly.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Apr 26, 2018)

jobo said:


> Well GUNs have no other purpose than to kill things,



And yet, I've been shooting for some 50 years and never killed anything. And the most severe injuries I've inflicted on any person have been from my hands (or feet).



> if your shooting TARkets ,your practising killing things. It's rather the same with your Bow  and crossbow to be honest, if you want to show of your hand eye coordination, play snooker or darts, or if you want something pOSHer, play croquet,
> 
> Look at it this way, if someone spent their Sunday afternoon practising hitting People shaped tarkets with their car, you might suspect them of being unsuitable to own a car



You mean like all the time I've spent pounding on BOB?


----------



## Grenadier (Apr 26, 2018)

*Admin's Note:*

Folks, I'm going to ask you to keep political matters out of here.  If you want to discuss the technical aspects of weaponry, tactics, etc., then please feel free to do so.  However, trying to throw in the usual tired arguments is not permitted. 

The owners of this forum do have a sister forum setup for those who wish to make such discussions. 

US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum


----------



## jobo (Apr 26, 2018)

[QUOTE="Dirty Dog,]And yet, I've been shooting for some 50 years and never killed anything. And the most severe injuries I've inflicted on any person have been from my hands (or feet).

Yes you have spent 50 years practising to kill something, that's a MIGhtt obsessive

You mean like all the time I've spent pounding on BOB?
We have already dealt with the Bob human shaped target Thing as somE what oDD


----------



## JowGaWolf (Apr 26, 2018)

Tez3 said:


> And there's also that 'husband deafness' when you are telling him something you need doing!


What?


----------



## Dirty Dog (Apr 26, 2018)

jobo said:


> Yes you have spent 50 years practising to kill something, that's a MIGhtt obsessive



Well, I started martial arts training in 1969, so I guess that's close enough to 50 years for our purposes. I started shooting at about the same time, and I had my own gun by 1970 or 1971 (I honestly don't remember exactly). I've never injured anyone with a gun, or even caused anyone pain with one. I've certainly done both with my martial arts training. I've never killed anyone, but I have broken a mans neck. I suspect he's dead by now, given the life expectancy of most quadriplegics. So it would certainly seem that my martial arts training is a more likely source of injury than my shooting hobby.
If you object to martial arts training, I don't understand why you're here, to be blunt.


----------



## jobo (Apr 26, 2018)

Dirty Dog said:


> Well, I started martial arts training in 1969, so I guess that's close enough to 50 years for our purposes. I started shooting at about the same time, and I had my own gun by 1970 or 1971 (I honestly don't remember exactly). I've never injured anyone with a gun, or even caused anyone pain with one. I've certainly done both with my martial arts training. I've never killed anyone, but I have broken a mans neck. I suspect he's dead by now, given the life expectancy of most quadriplegics. So it would certainly seem that my martial arts training is a more likely source of injury than my shooting hobby.
> If you object to martial arts training, I don't understand why you're here, to be blunt.


I didn't say I objected to ma training, I did say I laugh at people who buy a life sized doll to beat up.

If your not going to kill things with your gun, there is no point in having one, so your ether pretending to kill things or practising to kill things and as such you shouldn't be allowed to have one


----------



## Dirty Dog (Apr 26, 2018)

jobo said:


> I didn't say I objected to ma training



Yes. You did. Gun training is martial arts training.



> , I did say I laugh at people who buy a life sized doll to beat up.



I laugh at people who don't understand the value of practicing strikes on an anatomically correct target which much more closely approximates the impact feeling of a real body. So we're even.



> If your not going to kill things with your gun, there is no point in having one, so your ether pretending to kill things or practising to kill things and as such you shouldn't be allowed to have one



I hope I never have to kill anything with any of my martial arts training (which includes the guns). That doesn't mean I'm not willing to, if it's necessary. I guess, according to your ridiculous logic, I should have my hands and feet chopped off. Because, after all, I've spent most of a lifetime practicing how to kill with them.


----------



## jobo (Apr 27, 2018)

Dirty Dog said:


> Yes. You did. Gun training is martial arts training.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Being laugh at by a man with a doll, for not having a doll is something I can live with.

You are of course at liberty to consider guns a martial art, but most of the rest of the ma community seem to disagree, including the owners of this site, as they haven't included a messing about with guns section as one of the listed martial arts


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 27, 2018)

jobo said:


> Being laugh at by a man with a doll, for not having a doll is something I can live with.
> 
> You are of course at liberty to consider guns a martial art, but most of the rest of the ma community seem to disagree, including the owners of this site, as they haven't included a messing about with guns section as one of the listed martial arts


They also didn't include a "cane and staff" forum - those weapons and guns all fall under this: General Weapons Discussion


----------



## Dirty Dog (Apr 27, 2018)

jobo said:


> Being laugh at by a man with a doll, for not having a doll is something I can live with.



I'm sure you're used to it.



> You are of course at liberty to consider guns a martial art, but most of the rest of the ma community seem to disagree, including the owners of this site, as they haven't included a messing about with guns section as one of the listed martial arts



Ahhhh, I get it. You don't understand how the forums are structured. Arts are broken down by their culture (Japanese, Korean, etc) with weapons arts being discussed in a sub-forum called (pay attention here, it's complicated...) The Armoury. Each Sub-Forum (Korean Arts, the Armoury etc) has one or more specialty forum. Any specialty art (Taekwondo or Kumdo for Korea, for example) that gets discussed enough gets it own specialty forum. If gun use were heavily discussed, we'd split that off from the General sub-forum. If specifics got enough use, we'd further break that down into handguns, rifles, and shotguns, or even individual brand specialty forums, if use warranted.
Personally, I find it amusing that you're trying to tell staff how we organize the forums.


----------



## jobo (Apr 27, 2018)

Dirty Dog said:


> I'm sure you're used to it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I though the arnour


Dirty Dog said:


> I'm sure you're used to it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The armoury doesn't have a fire arm section, it has knives and swords etc But no guns, I suppose it could come under general weapons, but hey so could beer bottles,

I'm sorry you fell threatens by someone thinking your OBEssion n with causing death is a MIGht odd. I can understand it with these americans, they have a kill first let God sort it out attitude,The sanctity of human life is generally held a bit higher in the uk


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 27, 2018)

jobo said:


> I though the arnour
> 
> The armoury doesn't have a fire arm section, it has knives and swords etc But no guns, I suppose it could come under general weapons, but hey so could beer bottles,
> 
> I'm sorry you fell threatens by someone thinking your OBEssion n with causing death is a MIGht odd. I can understand it with these americans, they have a kill first let God sort it out attitude,The sanctity of human life is generally held a bit higher in the uk


That's a blatantly obvious trolling attempt. Not really worthy, at all. Also could be seen as a political statement.


----------



## jobo (Apr 27, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> That's a blatantly obvious trolling attempt. Not really worthy, at all. Also could be seen as a political statement.


 Some part of America have a death rate higher than a war zone, that not a political statement that's a fact.

They let people die who can't afford medICal care  and they execute people,. So what part of not caring as much for human life is incorrect


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 27, 2018)

jobo said:


> Some part of America have a death rate higher than a war zone, that not a political statement that's a fact.


So, a fact (with pretty sketchy terminology) leads you to a trolling generalization about all Americans.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 27, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> So, a fact (with pretty sketchy terminology) leads you to a trolling generalization about all Americans.




You shouldn't be surprised, he doesn't like the UK much either or at least the police, the military and most people in general


----------



## jobo (Apr 27, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> So, a fact (with pretty sketchy terminology) leads you to a trolling generalization about all Americans.


Not all but it seems a prevailing concept, as above in my edit, people with no money are allowed to die for want of medicine and execution take place. That's not high on the sanctity of life issUe,


----------



## jobo (Apr 27, 2018)

Tez3 said:


> You shouldn't be surprised, he doesn't like the UK much either or at least the police, the military and most people in general


I'm fine with the forces and people in general,


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 27, 2018)

jobo said:


> Not all but it seems a prevailing concept, as above in my edit, people with no money are allowed to die for want of medicine and execution take place. That's not high on the sanctity of life issUe,


Ah, and that generalization isn't at all political. Got it.


----------



## jobo (Apr 27, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Ah, and that generalization isn't at all political. Got it.


Only in as much a believing human life is sacred is Polictial, so that me and the pope
It's not political in the uk, we banned most guns, treat the sick and haven't hung anyone in 50 years, they are not political issues here,


----------



## pdg (Apr 27, 2018)

jobo said:


> we banned most guns, ------ they are not political issues here,



Actually, "guns" are a constant ongoing political item (as is the health service and crime/punishment).

And technically very few are banned, they're simply subject to a variety of licencing and usage restrictions that make some more difficult to acquire legally than they once were.


----------



## jobo (Apr 27, 2018)

pdg said:


> Actually, "guns" are a constant ongoing political item (as is the health service and crime/punishment).
> 
> And technically very few are banned, they're simply subject to a variety of licencing and usage restrictions that make some more difficult to acquire legally than they once were.


Very few, hundreds of assault rifles are banned and auto/ semi auto guns are banned, what you can have in your home is very very limited, those you can Only have at a range are banned for every other use. carry guns about with you is limited to the security services,

There are no mainstream polictions looking to deregulate guns, let poor people die of illness or start exIcuting  people, sO it's really up really just UKIP and a faFew Tory  loons


----------



## pdg (Apr 27, 2018)




----------



## pdg (Apr 27, 2018)

Obviously that picture above doesn't constitute an exhaustive list...


----------



## jobo (Apr 27, 2018)

pdg said:


> Obviously that picture above doesn't constitute an exhaustive list...



You can have sporting rifles,And non auto shotguns everything else is banned, however you measure it that a lot more band than not
And how many of them not banned guns can you Cary around with you ? None, that makes them banned, Every else than your home or the range or other private land


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 27, 2018)

pdg said:


> Obviously that picture above doesn't constitute an exhaustive list...




The one marked 'illegal in UK but legal in NI' is only partly true, only certain people are allowed to carry such as prison officers, police when off duty and others considered at risk from terrorists which still like to kill people despite the Good Friday Agreement.



pdg said:


> Actually, "guns" are a constant ongoing political item



Well not so much really, it comes up sporadically but there's no big push one way or another about weapons, too many other issues that need sorting.


----------



## pdg (Apr 27, 2018)

Tez3 said:


> The one marked 'illegal in UK but legal in NI' is only partly true, only certain people are allowed to carry such as prison officers, police when off duty and others considered at risk from terrorists which still like to kill people despite the Good Friday Agreement.



I'm using "allowed to possess" as the definition of legal to own, carrying any of them (or any item if you intend it as a weapon, whether that's it's primary purpose or not) is "banned" for almost all civilians.



Tez3 said:


> Well not so much really, it comes up sporadically but there's no big push one way or another about weapons, too many other issues that need sorting



It's a constant political issue for the various campaign groups, for and against.

I think it's a shame there are so many other issues (not because it detracts from firearm discussion, but because we as a country actually have so many issues).


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 27, 2018)

pdg said:


> It's a constant political issue for the various campaign groups, for and against.




Really? it's not an issue which actually finds many people bothered about. Campaign groups, well, yes each only having a few members, the general public isn't much interested. Several of the gun lobby groups here are financed and supported from the US, I assume they plan to sell weapons if they were to succeed in their campaign so it's a merchandising campaign more than an actual belief we ought to have more guns.




pdg said:


> I think it's a shame there are so many other issues (not because it detracts from firearm discussion, but because we as a country actually have so many issues).



Yeah but we are lucky, they are First World issues.



pdg said:


> I'm using "allowed to possess" as the definition of legal to own, carrying any of them (or any item if you intend it as a weapon, whether that's it's primary purpose or not) is "banned" for almost all civilians.





Actually in NI they aren't 'owned' they are issued hence allowing them to be 'legal'.


----------



## pdg (Apr 27, 2018)

Tez3 said:


> Actually in NI they aren't 'owned' they are issued hence allowing them to be 'legal'.



I was under the impression that private and personal handgun ownership was still legal in NI.

I never bothered to look into it because it has no bearing on me, so I'm perfectly happy to be completely wrong about that.

(Oh, and I didn't make that image either, I just grabbed it off the 'net)


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 27, 2018)

pdg said:


> I was under the impression that private and personal handgun ownership was still legal in NI.
> 
> I never bothered to look into it because it has no bearing on me, so I'm perfectly happy to be completely wrong about that.
> 
> (Oh, and I didn't make that image either, I just grabbed it off the 'net)




I've had to work there and have been one of the 'carriers'. Private ownership of handguns has to be by licence and is very rarely granted.

There is still an inordinate amount of weapons in the Province which were smuggled in by terrorist groups, paid for by American fund raising. The Police Service of Northern Ireland is one of two police forces in the UK that are routinely armed. There is a lot of misinformation about NI, especially on American sites because people don't understand the Troubles and the situation there.


----------

