Gun sales. You or your peeps profit.The only thing im pushing is 9th grade physics.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Gun sales. You or your peeps profit.The only thing im pushing is 9th grade physics.
Gun sales. You or your peeps profit.
No....... we don't blame car manufacturers we are actually pretty decent at calling out butt**** drunk drivers.Is it the car's fault it got driven by a drunk? This is the lamest excuse you've made to date.
Crack kills bro.Why would they? Some people refuse to be responsible, refuse to admit the truth or admit they are wrong, even partially, refuse to see how pwned they’ve been by a tyrannical violence obsessed military-industrial-congressional and libertarian corporate-fascist complex that benefits from the dismantling of the USA and the destruction of democracy itself. Fascists and fundamentalists hate complexity, hate diversity, love the “purity” of violence, yearn for an apocalyptic war led by their god.
the banality of evil means the people who do the most evil deeply believe in their own goodness and the ends-justify-means goodness of their god-given mission.
WTF? Spin baby spin. LOLNo....... we don't blame car manufacturers we are actually pretty decent at calling out butt**** drunk drivers.
Yupp Riley, that's what happened. It clearly wasn't you who original brought vehicles into this.WTF? Spin baby spin. LOL
Again, WTF? You're the one who said "It isn't the ammos fault it got fired at a child.". JFC - that's the dumbest argument you've made yet. I merely used another absurd comparison to demonstrate how dumb it is.Yupp Riley, that's what happened. It clearly wasn't you who original brought vehicles into this.
The tumble occurs in the body, not in the air.AK-47s shoot 7.62x39 ammo. A 30-06 with a hollow point would do much much more damage. Ar15 ammo also doesnt tumble. If it did, it would be incredibly innacurate.
And that was in response to your question about one specific type of bullet. See how that worked?Again, WTF? You're the one who said "It isn't the ammos fault it got fired at a child.". JFC - that's the dumbest argument you've made yet. I merely used another absurd comparison to demonstrate how dumb it is.
You are the spin master. LOL.
It's a bullet.The tumble occurs in the body, not in the air.
We were always taught that the goal was to just hit the enemy. Hit them in the leg and the bullet may actually tumble and bounce off other bones and exit, say, the shoulder. I always just assumed they knew what they were talking about. Battlefield wounds (only from talking to other members that had been deployed, because I never was) would suggest that they weren't wrong.
Nope. You're making less sense than usual. But I recognize this portion of the discussion with you - you're flailing and will do anything to keep the discussion going without admitting your foolishness. It's classic. So with that, I am out.And that was in response to your question about one specific type of bullet. See how that worked?
Way to quit while you were ahead Riley. You did great bud.Nope. You're making less sense than usual. But I recognize this portion of the discussion with you - you're flailing and will do anything to keep the discussion going without admitting your foolishness. It's classic. So with that, I am out.
All you are saying is that there are other rounds that have even more destructive power. No one is disputing that.It's a bullet.
From the perspective of destruction inside the 223 is a pretty weak rifle round.
Yeah - I edited that but you were too quick. I had one more thing to say.Way to quit while you were ahead Riley. You did great bud.
were you in the military?Shock words Riley. There is not an "explosion" it breaks apart quickly upon impact because that small of a bullet can't handle the energy. When you use the word "tumble" for people that speak firearms, that means it's ability to hit something and continue moving forward generally the ground and bounce. 223s dont "tumble" they break apart very rapidly after impact and lose energy fast.
You can't regulate a round and to think the 223 is any more destructive than the math of energy is foolish. Gnight ol' chap.Yeah - I edited that but you were too quick. I had one more thing to say.
Thanks though - I always try to quit while I'm ahead. You should try it. If you ever get ahead.
I was not.were you in the military?
I'm assuming you were
why would the military, during training, tell us they "tumble" if they don't "tumble"?
Yes, but a larger round packing more powder............I would understand that of people were using super crazy shit but as the other guy said by rifle standards the 223 is pretty mild. Yes, it is going really fast, it's a 22 caliber bullet.
You mean the 223 vs like a 22LR?Yes, but a larger round packing more powder............
The difference is in the different type of projectile used. A 62 grain full metal jacket fired from an AR15 would tumble inside the body, a hollow point will fragment. The military can not use hollow points,( see Geneva Convention).were you in the military?
I'm assuming you were
why would the military, during training, tell us they "tumble" if they don't "tumble"?
I agree, but what is the reason the 223 does so much damage?It's a bullet.
From the perspective of destruction inside the 223 is a pretty weak rifle round. To put this into perspective at 100 yards the 223 has roughly 980-1000 foot pounds of energy. A 30-06, the round from the M1 Garand has roughly 2500. At 300 yards the 223 is somewhere around 550 ft/lbs the 30-06 is 1925-1950, the heavier bullet carries the energy that much better.
Green tips for sure.I was not.
No bullet just stops. I believe you would have been using 62 grain "green tips" which are a hardened tip designed to hold itself together better. You have heard a bullet ricochet right? When firearms people talk about a bullet tumbling they are talking about 1 of two things. The bullets ability to hit something and bounce or roll in an uncontrollable manor after that(the ricochet) . Which makes certain rounds much more dangerous for hunting. Or, you can actually load a round with to much powder and the mass of the bullet isn't enough to hold the energy and the bullet will start tumbling in the are making it incredibly inaccurate.
It's a bullet thing not a 223 specific thing. You were likely using a type of bullet (known as "green tips" a 62grain hardened nose bullet that performs very well in the 1:7 twist barrel) that certainly would have held itself together, and held more energy, than anything soft tipped)I agree, but what is the reason the 223 does so much damage?
I was always told it was the "Tumble" that was caused once the bullet hit bone....again, the most common analogy was that it hit a solider in the hip, and "rolled" down the leg, coming out the ankle. This was common training knowledge spouted by every soldier I ever heard talk about battlefield injuries and triage.
Green tips are 100% designed to do it the best a 223 is capable of doing it yes. In rifle terms though a 223 isn't good at carrying that energy, because of mass.Green tips for sure.
So, you agree that some types of 223 rounds will "tumble", "ricochet" or "Roll", once they come in contact with something as hard as a bone, right?
Yes, 62 grain.......The difference is in the different type of projectile used. A 62 grain full metal jacket fired from an AR15 would tumble inside the body, a hollow point will fragment. The military can not use hollow points,( see Geneva Convention).
So you're in favor of regulating those 223 that do the damage we're talking about?It's a bullet thing not a 223 specific thing. You were likely using a type of bullet (known as "green tips" a 62grain hardened nose bullet that performs very well in the 1:7 twist barrel) that certainly would have held itself together, and held more energy, than anything soft tipped)
No. Because I'm smart enough to know 22-250, 243, 25-06, 270, 6.5 grendal, and a shit ton of other short chamber cartridges exist and your grasping for bullshit without identifying the actual problem. That and its a nato round so your up shits creek there.So you're in favor of regulating those 223 that do the damage we're talking about?
5.56x45 and 7.62x39 will both do terrible things to human bodies.We're talking about the destructive nature of AR-15 ammo and you're referencing walls and concrete blocks.
Very. Happens every once in awhile with our buddy with at least two handles.How drunk are you??
Lol. Figures. All talk and no action republican.No. Because I'm smart enough to know 22-250, 243, 25-06, 270, 6.5 grendal, and a shit ton of other short chamber cartridges exist and your grasping for bullshit without identifying the actual problem. That and its a nato round so your up shits creek there.
Banning isn't suggested. Regulation is.Many hunters feel it's unethical to hunt with a 223 because they've seen so many deer run off to never be found. Lots of guys try to start their kids on a .223 when they start deer hunting because there's pretty much nothing smaller that's legal. Inevitably, they switch to something with a little more punch. Those are the facts, so, if your position is that there is no place for something as powerful as a 223, that means you pretty much want to ban all center-fire rifle rounds. That's not happening so there's no reason to get your blood pressure up over it.
Regulate those too.5.56x45 and 7.62x39 will both do terrible things to human bodies.
You can hide behind many walls and just about any concrete from 5.56, much less so 7.62.
It's literally called the 5.56 nato ya dunce.Lol. Figures. All talk and no action republican.
NATO round? GTFOWTS.
No, you're the one making excuses consistent with the gun lobby.It's literally called the 5.56 nato ya dunce.
I'm not the one pissing my pants and talking about the lead in the pencil used to misspell words.
I'm giving you factual information on why your grasping is only making any stance your trying to make weaker and weaker.No, you're the one making excuses consistent with the gun lobby.
It's a bullet.
From the perspective of destruction inside the 223 is a pretty weak rifle round. To put this into perspective at 100 yards the 223 has roughly 980-1000 foot pounds of energy. A 30-06, the round from the M1 Garand has roughly 2500. At 300 yards the 223 is somewhere around 550 ft/lbs the 30-06 is 1925-1950, the heavier bullet carries the energy that much better.