Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Non Hunting > Politics
Are assault rifles needful for hunters? >

Are assault rifles needful for hunters?

Politics Nothing goes with politics quite like crying and complaining, and we're a perfect example of that.

Are assault rifles needful for hunters?

Old 12-22-2012, 12:27 PM
  #231  
Super Moderator
 
CalHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern California
Posts: 17,860
Default

Originally Posted by stormyday395 View Post
I think it makes for good debate. These very questions tha HD put forward are probably the same soul searching that the supreme court endures. To me, how could you even have a discussion on AWB's concerning new laws to be passed or even old laws, without answereing these hard to answere questions. If we were to just "not go there", then the discussion becomes very overly one sided. JMO
Actually, one could argue that it doesn't create "good debate." It obviously generates lots of posting activity as this topic is over 200 posts long but, in fairness, the topic got a huge boost and semi-hijacking from the Connecticut school shooting.

As for "good debate," shouldn't that include a practical examination of the efficiency and/or effectiveness of any proposed new laws? Much of what we've read has been sound bites and talking points.

Consider these following rough summaries of some of the "debate" in this topic.

Members in favor of increased AWB legislation argue that there should be at least a restriction on high capacity magazines. 30-round mags have been talked about in this topic but some of the public information on the Connecticut shooting says the shooter used 20-round mags (I don't think we know for sure what size he used yet).

Does arguing for a ban on 30-round mags when the shooter used 20-round mags change or accomplish anything? How about if you argue for a ban on 20-round mags and only 10-round or less mags are allowed? How about 5-round magazines? 2-rounds? Single shot? Where would this end? What exactly do you think will be accomplished if any of these potential magazine restrictions/bans were established and made law? Do you even know? Such a restriction could also affect a lot of pistols but I'll forgo such an argument.

Changing ANY of these magazines and recharging a live round in the chamber with an AR-style rifle takes maybe 3-5 seconds if a shooter is reasonably proficient at changing mags. I believe the Connecticut shooter shot something in excess of 100 rounds but how about we examine this with the 100-round figure in mind.

100 rounds comes out to 3 and 1/2 30-round mags, 5 20-round mags, 10 10-round mags and 20 5-round mags. Single shot would obviously be 100 rounds.

Assuming the shooter shoots 1 round for every 2 seconds, he should be able to shoot his 100 rounds in 200 seconds or 3 minutes and 20 seconds. That's definitely less time than just about any armed response (cops, etc.) is going to arrive at the school.

Now look at how much additional time would be needed for each magazine size listed above (Note--I'm assuming the rifle will already have the first mag loaded before he begins shooting):

30-round mags--3 mag changes = 9-15 seconds more.
20-round mags--4 mag changes = 12-20 seconds more.
10-round mags--9 mag changes = 36-45 seconds more.
5-round mags--19 mag changes = 57-95 seconds more.
Single shot (no mags)--99 reloads = 297 seconds (almost 5 minutes) to 495 seconds (almost 8 and 1/2 minutes).

Using the above time estimates for both shooting and reloading a rifle, the shooter could shoot the 100 rounds in anywhere from 3 and 1/2 minutes to just under 12 minutes. I stated in a previous post that an average police response time could reasonably take anywhere from 5 to 10+ minutes. There is no national average (for some reasons I could find such a statistic) but I think 5 minutes would be unusually fast. 8-10 minutes would be a lot more realistic and still an impressive response time for any jurisdiction.

Anyway, using the 8-10 guesstimate, that means the shooter would have shot most or all of his rounds in any of the above magazine restriction scenarios. That means most or all of those kids would still be dead. And that's really not an acceptable outcome for any of us.

So in the spirit of "good debate," what exactly would you propose that would actually be effective and work? I'm not trying to be a smart-aleck or criticize you as I think your point about a good debate and more information is actually spot on. I would like, however, to see the entire discussion get past the sound bite and talking point stage to the level where we actually use our collective expertise in the subject of guns to determine something that is feasible financially and that actually works.

So what do you propose and bring on the elevated debate.
CalHunter is offline  
Old 12-22-2012, 02:28 PM
  #232  
Typical Buck
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 979
Default

As for "good debate," shouldn't that include a practical examination of the efficiency and/or effectiveness of any proposed new laws?
Yes it should, as I have posted more than once, banning a 30 round clip is not going to cure the problem. I mentioned earliar post that he could have killed as many with a pump shotgun, and now I will ad that a crazy person in rage could take even more lives with a knife, especially if were defensless children.

Does arguing for a ban on 30-round mags when the shooter used 20-round mags change or accomplish anything?
As I just stated no it doesn't, it simply appeases the public, my take is without appeasment, and with the small numbers of the NRA, around 4 mil, worse legislation could come without compromise.

So in the spirit of "good debate," what exactly would you propose that would actually be effective and work? I'm not trying to be a smart-aleck or criticize you as I think your point about a good debate and more information is actually spot on. I would like, however, to see the entire discussion get past the sound bite and talking point stage to the level where we actually use our collective expertise in the subject of guns to determine something that is feasible financially and that actually works.
Truth is probably the culture of americans, of course the public won't wait on education to work, and as we know the family atmosphere is not comming around to meet the need. Also, these things can take a generation to actually show results. I'm not a crusader, and I know a hard line is fighting for your beleifs, but it seems to me that being outnumbered in the millions calls for a slight reconcilliation. I'm certain that checking mental ill will help alittle, so lets do that. There is a whole world out there that in any instance someone could have a domestic dispute and kill many, at any moment, with fire power, fire, poison, explosive or just down right hands on.

Last edited by stormyday395; 12-22-2012 at 02:30 PM.
stormyday395 is offline  
Old 12-22-2012, 03:01 PM
  #233  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Japan
Posts: 3,431
Default

You would not need an "assault rifle" with a 30 round magazine to get off almost 100 rounds long before the police would arrive.

He could have used a CZ-75B (9 mm.) like mine. One stock magazine holds 16 rounds and can be replaced in less than a second if you simply drop the empty mag out. You would need only five extra magazines. That would give you 97 rounds if you started with one in the chamber. One gun-five extra magazines.

(The CZ-75B is used by more police agencies, armies, etc., than any other handgun in the world.)

I hope I haven't just given the anti-gun crowd a reason to restrict us all to single-shot pistols.
cr422 is offline  
Old 12-22-2012, 06:30 PM
  #234  
Boone & Crockett
 
The Rev's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Burleson Texas
Posts: 12,560
Default

Originally Posted by cr422 View Post
I hope I haven't just given the anti-gun crowd a reason to restrict us all to single-shot pistols.
There's no end to the anti-gun people. Restrict us to single shot pistols and some idiot will use two six shooters to kill 12 people. Then they will try to out law all guns all together; I'm sure that is their main agenda to start with.

I don't know what it takes for them to understand that's it's impossible to protect innocent people from a crazy person that is determined to go out with a flash!

Remember Jim Jones; why don't they outlaw cool-aid? You just can't stop stupid!
The Rev is offline  
Old 12-22-2012, 07:56 PM
  #235  
Dominant Buck
 
Fieldmouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 37,303
Default

As I just stated no it doesn't, it simply appeases the public, my take is without appeasment, and with the small numbers of the NRA, around 4 mil, worse legislation could come without compromise.
FYI, one of the biggest reason on why we have our constitution is so the appeasing the public won't trample on my god given rights. You have already decided the masses have entittlement to my labor, the modern form of slavery. Why should they have a right to my guns?
Fieldmouse is offline  
Old 12-23-2012, 03:05 AM
  #236  
Typical Buck
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 979
Default

You have already decided the masses have entittlement to my labor,
yes, this is a fact

Why should they have a right to my guns?

Its not a question of 'should'. The constitution as you know can be amended, and laws can be made to take away some of our rights. Its been happening since day one
stormyday395 is offline  
Old 12-23-2012, 03:33 AM
  #237  
Dominant Buck
 
Fieldmouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 37,303
Default

Its not a question of 'should'. The constitution as you know can be amended, and laws can be made to take away some of our rights. Its been happening since day one
bingo, you can amend but you can make a law that takes away my god given rights.
Fieldmouse is offline  
Old 12-23-2012, 10:44 AM
  #238  
Little Doe Peep
 
sachiko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Japan
Posts: 14,945
Cool Police response time?

Earlier in this thread, Calhunter mentioned police response time.

I just happened to run across a good example from our local news.

"On Sunday December 23, 2012 at 12:49 a.m. officers responded to a convenience store on the 700 block of Pine St on report of an armed robbery.
The store employees reported that at 12:43 a.m. male entered the store wearing a plastic bag over his face, all black clothing, grey hat and gloves.
The male indicated that he was carrying a handgun but no weapon was seen. The accused took money and cigarettes before fleeing N/B Pine from the scene on foot. Officers attempted a K-9 track but were unsuccessful.
There were no reported injuries and store surveillance was not available at the time of this writing.
The LPD is requesting anyone who may have related information of this crime to contact Detective Sergeant Christopher Baldwin at (517) 483-6846.
Anonymous text message tips can be left at 847411, begin your text with LPD517 then leave your message."

Note that it took a mere six minutes before the police arrived, but the thief was gone with the money and cigarettes. Even the dog couldn't track the guy.

Sure, call 911. As the saying goes, when seconds count, the police are only minutes away.

I didn't post this to put a knock on the police who do a great job around here, just to inject a same-day dose of reality.
sachiko is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.