CIVIL WAR: Senate To Go For Handguns

reply to post by freedomwv


Well, an admitted Marxist. Your logic seems to carry over to "gun control". The US military not only wouldn't win a civil war, it would, at best, AT BEST, hunker down, in smaller pockets just to survive.

How has the military done in Vietnam with a largely unarmed/untrained population, Aftganistan,Hmmm? A bloody nose in Iraq and they would win a revolt in the US?? Against 4-5 million vets? Against 250 million weapons in the hands of the civilian population?? Half of them, if not more, would "change sides", a big chunk would desert just to take care of their families back home.

Here's the real view in Washington, D.C. Have they declared a "gun free" zone at the capitol?? Patriot missle batteries, road barriers and weapons abound. They KNOW being armed is better than trying to restrict weapons world-wide or even in-house. That's how the Feds protect themselves.

That's how we should defend ourselves as well.

The military is largely conservative and would see the civilians as the real defenders of the Constitution and a goodly number would support them.

The very fact we have a military is proof that depending on the compliance and good-will of all people and nations is nuts.

America isn't defenseless and neither should the citizens be. Keeping up with the Jones' is a fact of life. If a cartel member has an AR and you ban mine the advantage goes to the cartel member, the nut, the religious fanatic.

No one will get mine. "Gee, I sold it to a guy at a gun show...can't remember his name.....

Originally posted by freedomwv
reply to post by Valhall

 

The title of this thread clearly implies civil war related to tighter gun control laws, as well as, the thread starting post by the OP. A civilian grass roots civil war would mean fighting the governments military force; which would be totally a exercise in failure.

I totally agree with you on changing society. In order to have a more peaceful society people need to relearn the art of being social and interacting with each other with the society as a whole in mind. One of the biggest problem in modern America is this idea of `screw everyone else, stay off my grass, I want to help or care about anyone and I don`t want anyone helping me.` I see such thinking out of so many Americans what I wonder why people in America struggle to understand why the nation is so violent and on edge.

Americans, as a whole, need to learn how to work together for the benefit of everyone. It starts with building strong communities and involving more people in the process of living and working together everyday.

edit on 30-12-2012 by freedomwv because: grammar and spelling

The only "failure" in your scenario, would be the govt. assuming that the military would in fact, attack their own, friends, families, neighbors. Much of the US military is comprised of the very same ideologies of those who would stand against such threats, and even consider taking back the country by force.
So, with the obvious defections occuring, how long will it take for some officers and commanders to join the ranks of the insurgents? How quick will the rebels gain military hardware, and complete bases and installations?

Think broader, than you what you have been.

As for the rest of your post, it's sort of funny, that the things that you claim we need to work on, are the very things that we had and held dear, not that many years ago. We have been slowly dissolved, across families, and neighborhoods, and towns, and now as a country! I wonder who, or what, was the architect of that very elaborate plan?

We have ALL been played! They cater to our very ideals, and use our strengths as weaknesses, against us. They know us, better than we know ourselves.

One thing is for sure....Whatever their endgame is? We too, will know what is was all for, very, very soon.

reply to post by nwtrucker

No one will get mine. "Gee, I sold it to a guy at a gun show...can't remember his name.....

Well, one thing can be said without the least bit of uncertainty...That, will not be legal for much longer...

reply to post by L8RT8RZ


I see your honest attempt to improve our "lot". Yet, all the regulations, checks, qualifiers just empower the feds to run in more control on a situation that is, admittedly, out of hand.

For two hundred plus years, father have taught sons how to shoot, how to hunt, and looking at the carcass of the game, is shown what happens to loved ones if the guns are misused.

I sincerely believe, it's too late to regulate our way back to a sane healthy society. More laws just creates people who can't/won't comply with those new restrictions and as a result, creates a new breed of "criminals".This results in even more regulations and so on.....

The very fact that nuts, cartel members and religious fanatics can and do get ARs is sufficient reason for me to, at least match their firepower and hope they go after less well armed victims.

In house accidents is the consequence of armed households. It's a risk that I'm willing to take to protect my loved ones.

I will not allow, this gov't or simplistic solutions to put the criminals at an advantage over the good people of this country.

Just check out the capital. Not an arms free zone. Ordinance abounds. They know how to protect themselves, they do it with the best, most efficient weapons systems in the world. At the same time, they want us to have less protection. Something is wrong with that picture.

You seem like a good person, get your own weapons, learn how to use them safely, proficiently and hide them. We aren't going to fix this mess. it's too late......

Originally posted by jrod

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07


Can you aim properly? Maybe you are cross-wired in that you are right handed with a left dominant eye?

I find it impossible to believe you had to shoot someone three times to bring him down. People have been known to die with a single .22lr pistol shot at the chest. You gotta make the rounds count. And yes people on crack are tougher to stop because they are full of adrenaline.

There was a case in California where a bank robber on PCP was shot multiple times by the police and still was able to fight back. He was fatally shot in the heart but was able to keep shooting for 15+ secs after that fatal shot. One shot can kill someone, but more often than not it takes multiple shots and if someone is on certain drugs they can still fight back after suffering a fatal wound.

I used to attend security briefings for Airline personnel and one of the things covered in the briefs were individuals who were Psyco on PCPs. If I remember correctly, some on PCP display remarkable strength and we as crew members were warned that PCP aggression was almost unstoppable by a single crew member even if you were twice as big as the opponent.

According to the Calif. Swat member who was doing one of the briefings Swat had experienced several instances where a normal (non-PCP) person was able to continue moving and shooting even after a fatal shot was rendered; time was dependant on constitution and determination of the B.G..

Those on PCP type drugs were much more prone to continue their actions (almost unbelievably) after receiving multiple (normally) fatal shots.

The purpose of shooting someone is to stop the attack or their actions, by the quickest way possible which is a head or neck shot (spinal cord, nervous system disruption), but is very hard to do in a dynamic shooting situation. That is why you see LEOs (who are taught center of mass; collar bone to navel) to continue shooting until a threat is neutralized.

Yes .22 caliber weapons kill probably more people than any other caliber. The .22 caliber pistol was used by the Israeli Mossad to get the bad guys after the Munich massacre; all close range, never knew it was coming, head shots.

The .22 is better than a sharp stick but is absolutely the last choice for those who need a firearm for protection. Also the rim fire .22 is the least reliable bullet to depend on; pull the trigger and get a click instead of a boom by the nature of the primer. CCIs and other premo ammo are better but still not as reliable as most centerfire rounds. 9mm was considered by many departments to be the minimum but due to statistics of actual shootings, many departments have started using the .40 caliber; object is to stop the threat with least amount of collateral damage. Less shots fired less chance of hitting an innocent. Sounds good on paper but many still tend to empty a mag when the shooting starts.

I have known a girl who shot a B.G. who broke into her house one night . She fired one round of .22 @ center of mass and the guy grabbed his chest and said something rather colorful about being shot; then ran outside and died on the front lawn. If this individual would have been intent on cutting her throat, which he said he would do if she did not remove her clothes, he would have still had time to stab and kill her. Don't bring a knife to a gun fight comes to mind.......

As far as I am concerned the guy got what he deserved and she saved the tax payers and others from from having to deal with the sicko. No charges were filed against her. Justice actually works sometimes....

The movies and their fantasy worlds have done much to make people think when someone is shot they become DRT or incapable of continuing an attack, no screaming from pain, moaning, and very little blood, which is not always the case..obviously

reply to post by Timing


Do you want to know what I believe should be responsible?The pharmaceutical companies, if you research these tragedies you soon realize most of these psychotic individuals were on pharmaceuticals and we all know those drugs are detrimental to your health and state of mind.Video games don't have anything to do with it, thats just what most people use as an excuse.

reply to post by nwtrucker


I would not be in support of disarming the population at all. I think it is a good idea to have a population which is well versed in how to use firearms. You never know when you will need to start drafting people into the military in a time of emergency. Plus learning about firearms and gun safety teaches a person discipline in general; but that is just my opinion.

It is clear to me that American society is in pretty bad shape. Yes, I was born in the United States and lived there for the first 27 years of my life. My cultural background is American and I would not change that for anything in the world. When people start suggesting, or even implying, civil war that is a clear sign that something is very wrong with society. The American government, which is largely controlled by the capitalist class, is becoming more and more desperate to keep the gravy train with biscuit wheels going at all cost. Look at all the things which the government has been doing over the past 15 years in order to maintain the American Empire and how that has effected, not only the average American, but the entire world. Americans are becoming so dissatisfied with the state of affairs that some people are actually thinking about civil war. Americans need to have one huge struggle session nation wide and work things out; but civil war will not improve anything.

With that being said, I hear a lot of people screaming `Don`t take my guns!` yet offer no solution to solve this problem of `mostly young people living in suburbs and have enjoyed white privilege their entire lives flipping out and going on a killing spree. Things are bad in some inner cities with kids killing kids everyday and gun crime related to drugs totally out of control. Yet, few will even touch the problem of young white males flipping out and killing a bunch of people because ` mommy and daddy didn`t love them enough.`

It has been proven that gun crime in inner cities can be greatly reduced by investing on public works programs, setting up social volunteer centers for youth and improving the overall living situation. Yet, in the suburbs all of these things are already found in abundance and the youth are still flipping out and going on killing sprees.

I doubt it is `just the guns.` Yeah, there does need to be a nationwide conversation about gun control but more important there also needs to be a nationwide conservation about the current state of American society removed from left/right political battle grounds and fat overpaid under worked talking heads.

reply to post by freedomwv


the whole left/ right paradigm is whats fuching up this country the work for the same corporation.

reply to post by 727Sky


9mm, .38special, .38 super, 10mm, .40s&w tend to over-penetrate without causing enough hydro-static shock that is needed to paralyse the victim. The bullet corkscrews through the target without releasing its energy in the tissue.

I think it would be definitely better of the police to use .32acp jhp and .380acp fmj with good aim and let physics do their job. Not to mention "hot" thin rounds are difficult to put on target consistently because of the added recoil that causes flinching.

And yes people on drug stimulants are high on adrenaline. It is like chopping off the snake's head and watching the rest of the snake wiggle for minutes because of nervous reactions.

The bigger rounds are not bad if you can handle the recoil factor and .45acp would be the best choice. It is not a fast round. It is average speed that rellies primarily on mass to get the job done.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
The bigger rounds are not bad if you can handle the recoil factor and .45acp would be the best choice. It is not a fast round. It is average speed that rellies primarily on mass to get the job done.

This is why the 9mm never caught on in SOCOM - operators preferred the .45 for its "knockdown" power.

We of course had the M92's when the Amy switched but for shoot house/hostage rescue and building clearing missions .45's (from various makers) were purchased. We'd use the MP5 in most load outs and a three shot 1 in the head two to the chest combo for a soft target takedown.

However sometimes assault weapons were required to breach outside the target (work one's way to a central building) making the caring of the MP5/sidearm combo a bad choice because of range. That is when the .45 was carried as a sidearm and used as a tool for CQB inside work.

We'd still carry the 9mm for a back up on a regular type mission because after all the primary purpose of the side arm is just to bridge the gap between a malfunction of your primary weapon and finding a covered position to fix it. Likely you’d just be pumping out suppressive fire to keep heads down and the higher capacity magazine in that situation is actually preferable.

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

 

Yes, I can aim properly...... I have taken down 23 deer, 3 moose, I lost count of rabbits and squirrel long time ago.

Sorry I didn't mean to be rude or anything but there are lots of folks who are cross wired and don't know it. I am a rabid hunter for birds and rabbits and trust me it was years before someone pointed out my fault...that I was cross wired.

Yes I like 12 guage shotguns, but now I shoot from the left shoulder and have to compromise on the load factor to avoid sore shoulders for days. I went from 1-1/4 loads to 7/8 loads which feels like a 20 guage shotgun. I haven't regreted it one bit; less recoil and more pellets on target. Before I was left of the target consistently and very frustrating.

reply to post by Golf66


Yes hydro-static shock is very important but fast rounds tend to defeat the purpose. I am suprised more people don't go with smaller hollow point rounds. Even a .32acp that opens up like a mushroom inside the body is preferable to a 9mm imo.



versus 9mm fmj...



See what I mean? One expands early on, while the second "tunnels through" without releasing its energy. Now if someone is living in alaska and wearing many frozen clothes there could be a problem, but overall I prefer average speed, medium caliber hollow points.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


I was a big fan of Glaser Safety Slugs. Total energy expenditure inside the target, as long as it is tissue that is your target. I put .357 into an unopened can of beer at point range... it did not exit. I did get a beer bath. Before anyone complains, it was Meisterbrau.
I know a person that took his fat whitetail doe with a .22 WMR this year. He shot her in the neck. She dropped immediately. But the bullet passed into the front shoulder and basically ruined it. Hollowpoint hit the humerus and blew up. Not a speck of it left bigger than coffee grounds.
It is really about gun control....meaning bullet placement.

While I love to discuss ballistics, the physics of it, has been taken as far as it can.
What science has determined, is that the logistics of a shooting can not fully explain, the effectiveness of one caliber over another, due to the variables, inherently involved with each.

As previously stated, the "determination factor" of a BG, can not be quantified, therefore the best and most successful use of a firearm in stopping a threat, is not caliber, but shot placement.

Regardless of how "immune" or determined an assailant is, if you shut down their body, their will, is useless.

The positive effects of hydrostatic shock, can best be described as, major tissue trauma resulting in severe blood loss, or a major disruption of muscular, neurological or skeletal functions, or a combination of these.

Bottom line:
A sound understanding of anatomy, coupled with a high degree of accuracy, can in application, be the most effective combination of arresting a physical threat, far exeeding a given caliber.

GUNS do not kill people. PEOPLE kill people. Period. If you take away the guns, people will use knives and swords, take away the knives and swords, people will use sticks and stones.

reply to post by itbenickp
No.
If you take away the guns, criminals will still use guns.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


My mistake. I googled around a bit and didn't find anything on crosswired, so I thought you were poking fun of me lol

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by Golf66

 

Yes hydro-static shock is very important but fast rounds tend to defeat the purpose. I am suprised more people don't go with smaller hollow point rounds. Even a .32acp that opens up like a mushroom inside the body is preferable to a 9mm imo.

I really didn't want to argue with you. I was just pointing out what the preference was in the SOCOM community. Bottom line is that shot placement is the determining factor. We were head shot proficient followed by two to the chest.

However, no police forces train to that standard. Maybe SWAT. It takes a different mindset.

Most people are not taught that either just taught to aim center mass. We used the MAG Safe rounds inside a building to mitigate possible blue on blue.

I know I can't still shoot a 1 inch group anymore and perhaps I could carry something smaller but I really like the 1911 because that is what I am most proficient with. I am not going for headshots in my home defense nowadays because I am not shooting 500+ rounds a day anymore.

Also I don’t live in an area that an accidental sighting of a fobus holster is going to result in a 911 call either. Most people here are armed and comfortable with firearms. I don’t fear the accidental sighting view so size is not an issue.

Besides I am simply more accurate with it my muscle memory is best.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


You just compared a slower jacketed hollowpoint projectile with a faster full metal jacket projectile. Of course it's not going to expand as much, FMJ is designed for penetration.

Best ammo to use for 9mm is a quality jacketed hollowpoint. It doesn't punch through and the expansion slows it significantly, transmitting that energy to the surrounding tissues. That being said, I carry a .40 s&w, but I wouldn't feel terrible if that was 9mm. With good ammo 9mm is very effective. Just don't feed it cheap target ammo and expect it to work as good as the latest flavor from Cor-Bon or Hornady. FWIW.

reply to post by rockoperawriter


I agree to a degree, yet this one issue is definitely coming from one side. The elitists, be they corporate or socialist, (one and the same?), fear the great equalizer that is guns and it seems to be coming far more from the left. That's the issue of this thread and that's the why I support the right on this one.

reply to post by freedomwv


I have to admit I'm one of those "don't take my guns" and I don't have a solution either. Mia culpa.LOL.

The social programs are all well and good and do help those that are willing to accept the help. I guess your younger than me and are more optimistic. I believe that there's too much momentum built in this down-slide and nothing short of a major catastrophy can change it now.

I'm one step short of a "prepper" and have at least made the plans, though haven't acted on them. I still work and take care of my family, largely with the view of a traditional future. Yet at the same time, I'm educating myself a little at a time on a "non-traditional future".

This may be harder for younger people to envision, probablu due not experiencing just how far that slide has gone.

Still, in rebut, we don't have to have a "solution" to keep our guns. As a matter of fact, no solution is even more reason to keep em.IMO