The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: ScubaGuy on December 20, 2012, 07:14:29 AM
-
The Op says everything that needs to be said.
AR15 riffles (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022037497)
nadinbrzezinski (113,795 posts)
View profile
You know what is crazy about the defense of AR 15
In civilian hands?
"They have no flash suppressor, they don't have a bayonet lug, they don't have a selector..." Enough already, with all these deficiencies, these weapons are fund around the world in actual combat zones.
I took care of really bad guys shot by the army (not the US Army) with FAL battle riffles. I aso took care of good guys shot by AR -15 type weapons. They share the same exact ammunition.
You know the crazy part, both sides had their weapons set in the same accurate fire, one by choice, the other by need.
So stop preaching. Christianne Ammampour mentioned she saw them in Bosnia. And in other places around the word.
Let me tell you something, the worst massacre I had the pleasure of tending to, was only five. It was still a war zone. So damn it, yes, I can picture the pools of blood, the coppery smell, the human waste they found, and the destroyed bodies. I can see them in my mind's eye. So please, those f you arguing but, but it s the most popular riffle...not just in the US...it is also quite popular in war zones.
So think about that when you make that...yes stupid, NRA talking point, derived argument.
If you have not noticed, many of us are tired of them, six rounds a second...100 minute. Enough is enough.
:lmao:
-
nadinbrzezinski (113,795 posts)
Enough already, with all these deficiencies, these weapons are fund around the world in actual combat zones.
So are 9mm's and shotguns, you dumb fat bitch.
-
6 rounds a second is actually 360 a minute :whistling:
-
6 rounds a second is actually 360 a minute :whistling:
Don't confuse a liberal with facts.
-
nadinbrzezinski (113,795 posts)
View profile
You know what is crazy about the defense of AR 15
In civilian hands?
"They have no flash suppressor, they don't have a bayonet lug, they don't have a selector..." Enough already, with all these deficiencies, these weapons are fund around the world in actual combat zones.
I took care of really bad guys shot by the army (not the US Army) with FAL battle riffles. I aso took care of good guys shot by AR -15 type weapons. They share the same exact ammunition.
FAL=.308
AR15=.223 (or 5.56mm)
NOT THE SAME, although I do encourage the DUmmies to prove me wrong.
-
I am just in awe that she thinks that highly of herself. She is like a skit on SNL. :rofl:
-
If you have not noticed, many of us are tired of them, six rounds a second...100 minute. Enough is enough.
Damn, didn't see this. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
-
FAL=.308
AR15=.223 (or 5.56mm)
NOT THE SAME, although I do encourage the DUmmies to prove me wrong.
Gee; I don't know if they can come up with enough cinder block and chicken wire in this horrible BOOOOOOOSH 0-conomy.
-
You know the crazy part, both sides had their weapons set in the same accurate fire, one by choice, the other by need.
That one stumped me as to what the crazy bald dwarf omni-expert was even trying to say, but I finally figured that she must have meant they were both firing semi-auto only.
:lmao:
-
When will the bald dwarf stop confusing AR-15s and M-16s?
And then...
So damn it, yes, I can picture the pools of blood, the coppery smell, the human waste they found, and the destroyed bodies. I can see them in my mind's eye.
...the hyperbole of her imagination......
-
A HERETIC I AM (9,228 posts)
3. Will you please, PLEASE stop spelling the word as "riffle"
View profile
The weapon is a "RIFLE" with one "F".
Riffle rhymes with piffle and sniffle.
Rifle rhymes with stifle and pie full.
You have been doing that a lot lately. It's getting annoying.
Someone going on ignore in...3, 2, 1.
:lmao:
-
Thu Dec 20, 2012, 04:15 AM
nadinbrzezinski (113,795 posts)
You know what is crazy about the defense of AR 15
OP ommitted the date and time of this DUmp post. If you copy from the bottom up, date and time come along.
Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)
Thu Dec 20, 2012, 04:28 AM
ProgressiveProfessor (19,602 posts)
2. Not quite true
The FAL fires a .308 round, not a .223, which is more destructive, particularly if non FMJ rounds are being used.
This is not a minor detail. A .308 (7.62 NATO, the round the M-14 uses) is vastly more destructive.
The tradeoffs are much more recoil and an infantryman can carry far fewer rounds due to weight.
six rounds a second...100 minute.
Sixty centimeters in a meter.
-
Maybe she has some sort of learning disorder that makes her confused about numbers when 6's and 100's are involved. Or perhaps she is very confused about the duodecimal system.
-
Maybe she has some sort of learning disorder that makes her confused about numbers when 6's and 100's are involved. Or perhaps she is very confused about the duodecimal system.
GOBUCKS is probably right. She was probably talking about metric seconds.
-
GOBUCKS is probably right. She was probably talking about metric seconds.
Ah, yes, of course! Metric Seconds. Those would of course be very confusing to plebeian Americans like ourselves. :whatever:
-
Maybe she has some sort of learning disorder that makes her confused about numbers when 6's and 100's are involved. Or perhaps she is very confused about the duodecimal system.
Yes.
-
I am just in awe that she thinks that highly of herself. She is like a skit on SNL. :rofl:
Perfect! :thumbs: But that would be some 20th century iteration of SNL though.
FAL=.308
AR15=.223 (or 5.56mm)
NOT THE SAME, although I do encourage the DUmmies to prove me wrong.
:-)
-
Face it .That bitch is crazy. And I'm betting her keyboard has half the letters missing. or its been so abused by the short bald crazy dwarf that tthe ones she has stick a lot.
-
IIRC, a British infantry man has the record at 38 rounds a minute on target with the Enfield 303 in the 30s. The 303 was a kick ass round that was said to be able to penetrate a railroad rail. Bolt action and reloads included. I'm sure that the Enfield first made in the 19th century (for lurking DUmmys that is the 1800s) would be considered whatever the "scare the morons" term the democrat party has come up with lately for riffles.
I had a chance to get a Longbranch Enfield a few years ago and still kick my self for not "pulling the trigger" on that buy.
-
Maybe she has some sort of learning disorder that makes her confused about numbers when 6's and 100's are involved. Or perhaps she is very confused about the duodecimal system.
Or maybe she's just a dumbass.
-
IIRC, a British infantry man has the record at 38 rounds a minute on target with the Enfield 303 in the 30s. The 303 was a kick ass round that was said to be able to penetrate a railroad rail. Bolt action and reloads included. I'm sure that the Enfield first made in the 19th century (for lurking DUmmys that is the 1800s) would be considered whatever the "scare the morons" term the democrat party has come up with lately for riffles.
I had a chance to get a Longbranch Enfield a few years ago and still kick my self for not "pulling the trigger" on that buy.
I haven't checked ballistics tables, but .303 British is not as powerful a round as a .30-06.
I've always thought of it as more like .308 Win., and maybe a hair less.
I may nadin the ballistics later.
-
IIRC, a British infantry man has the record at 38 rounds a minute on target with the Enfield 303 in the 30s. The 303 was a kick ass round that was said to be able to penetrate a railroad rail. Bolt action and reloads included. I'm sure that the Enfield first made in the 19th century (for lurking DUmmys that is the 1800s) would be considered whatever the "scare the morons" term the democrat party has come up with lately for riffles.
I had a chance to get a Longbranch Enfield a few years ago and still kick my self for not "pulling the trigger" on that buy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mad_minute
Mad minute was a pre-World War I term used by British riflemen during training to describe scoring 15 hits onto a 12" round target at 300 yd (274.3 m) within one minute using a bolt-action rifle (usually a Lee-Enfield or Lee-Metford rifle). It was not uncommon during the First World War for riflemen to greatly exceed this score. Many riflemen could average 30+ shots, while the record, set in 1914 by Sergeant Instructor Alfred Snoxall was 38 hits.[1] It was rumored that a company of assaulting German soldiers reported that they had faced machine gun fire, while in fact it was a rifle squad of ten men firing at this rate. Annually, a group of British owners meet for a mad minute competition.
-
"They have no flash suppressor, they don't have a bayonet lug, they don't have a selector
I have to rush home. I could have swore my Rock River had a flash suppressor and selector switch when I left this morning. Leave it to Nads for being a true idiot. :loser:
-
I am just in awe that she thinks that highly of herself. She is like a skit on SNL. :rofl:
She is like the real people behind SNL. Saw a behind the scenes last week where they took credit for getting GWB elected, making youtube popular and ending male dominance in comedy.
-
6 rounds a second is actually 360 a minute :whistling:
Not in the Metric system! :rotf: :tongue:
-
A .308 (7.62 NATO, the round the M-14 uses) is vastly more destructive [than a .223]..
The .223 begins to tumble when it impacts creating a small entrance wound, but terrible internal damage. The 7.92×57mm and 8mm Mauser cartridges, American .30'06, British .303, and NATO .308 leave large entrance and exit wounds, but don't do the internal damage that the .223 does.
That's one reason why the Russians switched from the (AK-47) 7.62×39mm round to the (AK-74) 5.45×39mm cartridge. It's all about ballistics and bullet design - of which the bald dwarff knows nothing.
What you don't really want is to be hit in the arm or leg with a round from a .58 calibre 1863 Springfield riffle. The only cure is the surgeon's saw.
Damn that sticking 'ff' key
-
So stop preaching. Christianne Ammampour mentioned she saw them in Bosnia. And in other places around the word.
Let me tell you something, the worst massacre I had the pleasure of tending to, was only five. It was still a war zone. So damn it, yes, I can picture the pools of blood, the coppery smell, the human waste they found, and the destroyed bodies. I can see them in my mind's eye. So please, those f you arguing but, but it s the most popular riffle. . . .
Christianne Ammampour has been around the word. Nadin Brzezinski doesn't even come close to the word.
3. Will you please, PLEASE stop spelling the word as "riffle"
The weapon is a "RIFLE" with one "F".
Riffle rhymes with piffle and sniffle.
Rifle rhymes with stifle and pie full.
You have been doing that a lot lately. It's getting annoying.
Oh, come on. It's just a triffling error.
Nadine offers her expertise on a wide variety of subjects. It does nothing for her credibility to CONTINUOUSLY misspell the word "rifle" , particularly whe she is attempting to speak with some authority.
"NadinE"?? He who is without speling errors, let him cast the first scone.
10. Having an issue with spelling
Oh my.
"Oh my"?? Nadin pulls a frank.
It takes away from the credibility? To point out what they do if the word of the precious is misspelled? You do know there is this thing called dyslexia right?
Oh and won't call you on the misspelling on your post about my name...I consider spelling calls impolite...to put it mildly, since you or I really do not know if that is lack of knowledge (how my name is spelled) or an actual disability.
What you alluded to is the misspelling that increases with stress among mild dyslexics.
Nadin has a mild case of dylsexia.
Congrats for being petty.
Don't worry, my actual submitted work is spell checked and it s edited. A three in the morning piece, while waiting for husband, after watching Piers Morgan call gun nutters liars on national tv, not so much.
It's late. Nidan is waiting for her hubby to come home, lying there on the divan, clad in her skimpy négliggée, cradling her minni-riffle--and you criticize her for her spelling??
Actual photo:
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_262XrOpq0c0/TRxPdPZoZoI/AAAAAAAAAn0/5t6iOCmYZOY/s400/a1.jpg])
13. Actually, what takes away from your credibility is not only the fact you can't spell
but also the padding of your resume...
"Been in enough shoot outs to fill nightmares."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1996780
and the fact you can't do simple math.
"six rounds a second...100 minute"
you are a joke.
And you are a bully! To the igy list with you!
-
So now she has dyslexia?
I know that dyslexia causes problems with reading, but I didn't know that dyslexia causes you to press the 'f' key twice instead of once.
Is odd that she can spell 'dyslexia' correctly?
-
Actually, Charles, I think there's something else going on here.
I remember it from when the oblate spheroid constantly misspelled "rabbis," surely a word she knows better than most of us.
I think the oblate spheroid is convinced her way of spelling is the way words are supposed to be spelled, so damn it, she's going to keep spelling them her way until the rest of us get with the program and do it too.
Her God complex, you know.....
-
Yes, Nadin has dysmexia. If you'd been in the bloodbaths and shootouts she's been in, you'd have it to.
-
Mad minute was a pre-World War I term used by British riflemen during training to describe scoring 15 hits onto a 12" round target at 300 yd (274.3 m) within one minute using a bolt-action rifle (usually a Lee-Enfield or Lee-Metford rifle). It was not uncommon during the First World War for riflemen to greatly exceed this score. Many riflemen could average 30+ shots, while the record, set in 1914 by Sergeant Instructor Alfred Snoxall was 38 hits.[1] It was rumored that a company of assaulting German soldiers reported that they had faced machine gun fire, while in fact it was a rifle squad of ten men firing at this rate. Annually, a group of British owners meet for a mad minute competition.
Thanks Fiddy. Because of my disgust with wiki on political grounds I forget to look at it on all other subjects.
-
The .223 begins to tumble when it impacts creating a small entrance wound, but terrible internal damage. The 7.92×57mm and 8mm Mauser cartridges, American .30'06, British .303, and NATO .308 leave large entrance and exit wounds, but don't do the internal damage that the .223 does.
That's one reason why the Russians switched from the (AK-47) 7.62×39mm round to the (AK-74) 5.45×39mm cartridge. It's all about ballistics and bullet design - of which the bald dwarff knows nothing.
What you don't really want is to be hit in the arm or leg with a round from a .58 calibre 1863 Springfield riffle. The only cure is the surgeon's saw.
Damn that sticking 'ff' key
I think that's a characteristic of FMJ bullets, not unique to .223. They lose stability on impact, which means tumbling or deflection.
The .30-06 fires a bullet of nearly three times the weight at 90% of the velocity. It's far more powerful and deadly at far greatere range.
-
I wonder in any of the DUmpmonkeys are interested in this.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/race.cfm
-
I wonder in any of the DUmpmonkeys are interested in this.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/race.cfm
Black victims are over represented in homicides involving drugs. Compared with the overall involvement of blacks as victims, blacks are less often the victims of sex-related homicides, workplace killings, and homicide by poison.
Well, duh! :fuelfire:
-
I haven't checked ballistics tables, but .303 British is not as powerful a round as a .30-06.
I've always thought of it as more like .308 Win., and maybe a hair less.
I may nadin the ballistics later.
The .303 is only slightly less powerful, but in the same class...however the military loadings of .30-06 and .308 are ballistically identical, the bullet is exactly the same weight (Exactly the same in every other way for that matter in the ball loading), the only difference is that the .308 (Nowadays known as the 7.62x51 or 7.62 NATO in the military version) used more modern propellants at higher pressures to achieve the exact same muzzle velocity as .30 M2 Ball, the whole purpose of the round being to get the case as much shorter as possible by applying 40 years worth of development in propellant technology to the problem. That was really the whole reason the .308 round was developed around the end of WW2.
The '06 was about the longest standard military cartridge in use in the world and nothing in use in other countries with other standard calibers could be converted to '06 easily and with sufficient reliability for military purposes. Army Ordnance experimented with the MG42 converted to '06 during the War, but it didn't work worth crap due to the longer '06 cartridge, and so they turned their backs on the gun. In other countries, however the MG42 with only about three significantly modified parts (Feed tray, pawl, and .308/7.62 barrel) became the MG1/MG3, and had a long record of successful service (Still going on, in fact). Of course we had hungry engineers and ordnance officers to feed, so we didn't go with that solution but instead developed the M60 (Incorporating the MG42 feed system and the FG42 gas system) shortly before Viet Nam and the horrifyingly-unreliable and complex M73/M219 MGs, the latter of which won an exceptionally-crooked shoot-off competitions managed by the same Ordnance Corps pukes who were going to be making them over better weapons like the MAG and MG1/3 (An eyewitness described what went down to me, all I can say is it's a case study of what happens when you have a government-run enterprise as a competitor with private industry, and the same government entity that made its entry is judging the competition).
The M60 proved only moderately reliable but complex and expensive to make (Somewhat complex to reassemble when fully stripped, and prone to have an important part fall off as well), and finally lost an honest shoot-off to the M240 when there was a competition for a new AFV MG to replace the M219s in the late 70s, the 219s having been the bane of tank gunners since their adoption, and after-action analysis from Viet Nam finally providing the catalyst to dump the damned pieces of crap. A vehicle-mount configured FN MAG proved to have only 1/3 the MTBF of a similarly-configured M60, and so it became the M240, simple and reliable (Still not as quick to change a barrel on as an MG42/1/3/53, but a bit better at long range since it is gas operated rather than short recoil operated, yielding a more rigid sight plane). A decade later the rest of the M60s went away with the adoption of the M240B, the infantry/GPMG-configured FN MAG (Heavier than the MG42/1/3/53, but at this point there was a parts commonality strength for it since the M240 tank coax was already in the system).
-
6 rounds a second is actually 360 a minute :whistling:
Not when you use Nadin Noodle Math.
Then 6 rounds a second equals 100 and 60 centimeters equals a meter.
-
Not when you use Nadin Noodle Math.
Then 6 rounds a second equals 100 and 60 centimeters equals a meter.
Babylonian or Persian meters?
-
Babylonian or Persian meters?
Actually, I believe it is in early Mesopotamian meters.
-
GNads is the new meter-maid in town.
She is also uneducated in respect to "riffling" twist.
As I recall, the original m-16 had a 1/12 or 1/14 twist.
It's ability to stabilize the 50-55gr projectile was marginal.
I also seem to remember a version (A2?), that went to a 1/7 to fire the 72gr.
This is just memory, not teh google.
You guys that have first hand knowledge will have to get me set right.