ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 6th October 2017, 10:51 AM   #361
mgidm86
Illuminator
 
mgidm86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,689
Uh my above post was supposed to be in separate paragraphs, but it came out all in one big mess. No matter how I edit it I can't fix it.
mgidm86 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 11:52 AM   #362
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 8,381
Originally Posted by Kestrel View Post
It's also worth noting that an expert who can fire 30 rounds in a minute is unlikely to keep that rate up for a long period. The Las Vega shooter had no problems keeping up a high rate of fire for 11 or 12 minutes.
What do you think the limit is? Is the limiting factor fatigue? I don't think I'd have any problem firing thirty 30-round magazines in ten minutes.

Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Really? On what basis? At 400+ yards? Against moving targets? At night? Firing hundreds of rounds in minutes? He was spraying into a crowd. That was his only target.
Yes really. Based on my experience with rapid firing an AR-15. If I was bump firing into the crowd at 400 yards I think I'd be missing the target area at times. With aimed semi-auto fire at the rate of 1-2 per second I could ensure every bullet went into the target zone.

Until I know more about how many rounds he expended and where those bullets went, I don't have any reason to believe his shooting was accurate enough to justify the higher rate of fire with the slide fire stock.

Last edited by Ranb; 6th October 2017 at 11:58 AM.
Ranb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 12:00 PM   #363
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,345
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
What do you think the limit is? Is the limiting factor fatigue? I don't think I'd have any problem firing thirty 30-round magazines in ten minutes.


Yes really. Based on my experience with rapid firing an AR-15. If I was bump firing into the crowd at 400 yards I think I'd be missing the target area at times. With aimed semi-auto fire at the rate of 1-2 per second I could ensure every bullet went into the target zone.

Until I know more about how many rounds he expended and where those bullets went, I don't have any reason to believe his shooting was accurate enough to justify the higher rate of fire with the slide fire stock.
Is there a need for bump firing?
__________________
Palestinian Refugees
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 12:08 PM   #364
Kestrel
Philosopher
 
Kestrel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Colorado
Posts: 5,850
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
Is there a need for bump firing?
It helps sell ammunition. Nothing could be a higher priority for our freedom loving nation.

Last time I checked .223 rounds were at least $.50 each in bulk. Using bump fire to empty one 30 round magazine in 10 seconds costs about the same as going to a movie.
Kestrel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 12:10 PM   #365
Metullus
Forum ¾-Wit Pro Tem
 
Metullus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,912
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
Is there a need for bump firing?
Need? Perhaps not. Do we really want to establish "need" as the principal test to determine whether or not people should be able to own something?
__________________
I have met Tim at TAM. He is of sufficient height to piss on your leg. - Doubt 10/7/2005 - I'll miss Tim.

Aristotle taught that the brain exists merely to cool the blood and is not involved in the process of thinking. This is true only of certain persons. - Will Cuppy
Metullus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 12:12 PM   #366
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 8,381
Originally Posted by mgidm86 View Post
Should machine guns be legal because they are actually less dangerous? It sounds like you are saying that they are actually less dangerous.
Actually I said that if he aimed instead of sprayed he might have killed/injured more people. This is based upon my actual experience with shooting an AR-15. What do you have that says otherwise?

Originally Posted by mgidm86 View Post
You think he could have hit upwards of 500 people in 9 minutes without the bump stock? Now I don't know that all 500 were gun shot victims, but if they were, we're talking about almost 1 hit per second. For nine minutes straight. No way.
I do think he could have exceeded 500 people shot if he aimed instead of sprayed.

Originally Posted by mgidm86 View Post
And we're talking about actual hits, not just trigger pulls. I find your posts about guns pretty well informed, but I think you are off here.
So far all I have from you is "I don't believe it" Do you have anything better? I know all I've brought to the table are anecdotes based on my own experiences, but I'm being honest. If I could set up a demonstration to show the effectiveness of bump fire vs aimed fire I would do so. But the only nearby rifle range I have access to that allows rapid fire is currently not allowed to use firearms.

Originally Posted by mgidm86 View Post
What if he were much closer to the crowd? ETA: I can't format this post properly for some reason. Should be more than one paragraph.
If he was much closer, so close that even the wildly jumping muzzle was not enough to over/undershoot the target, then bump fire would probably be more effective.
Ranb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 12:17 PM   #367
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 8,381
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
Is there a need for bump firing?
Only if the shooter wants to makes lots of noise and send much lead downrange in a hurry. Not something I want to do although I've given it a try just to see what the fuss was about. I thought it was stupid. The times I did it I was thinking, "This is crap, can't hit a thing with it and it's a waste of ammo."
Ranb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 12:19 PM   #368
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 62,895
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
People seem to be hung up on the rate of fire as if this was the primary reason why there were so many casualties. I'm suggesting that the spray and pray technique employed by the shooter might have been less effective than simply aiming each shot rapidly. Two shots per second still enables him to dump a 1000 rounds into a crowd in ten minutes including mag changes.
And you seem hung up on discounting the rate of fire over some technicality.

You can speculate all you want. Bullets rained down on a packed concert at a rapid rate. Why are you defending the bump stocks?
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 12:20 PM   #369
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 62,895
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
Yes it most certainly would depend upon the skill of the shooter. Although I have limited experience in using bump fire, I think it would take more skill to hit a large target at long distance using a slide fire stock than with slower aimed fire. High volume fire does not always make up for aiming.

It is only the bullets that hit the target that do any good. People seem to be very impressed with the audio of the effect. They also point to videos showing high rates of fire which do not show anything hitting the target or at best bullets haphazardly hitting/missing the target.
Bullets hit more than 500 people. That's a **** lot of people shot.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 12:26 PM   #370
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,576
A glimpse at how foreign correspondents might report on America:
Quote:
This week international analysts are sounding the alarm on the increasing instability of the United States after an outbreak of gun violence, government corruption scandals and failure to provide basic services to citizens.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...reign-nations/
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 12:27 PM   #371
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 8,381
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
And you seem hung up on discounting the rate of fire over some technicality.
Nope.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
You can speculate all you want. Bullets rained down on a packed concert at a rapid rate. Why are you defending the bump stocks?
I thought I was mocking the bump fire stock. Can you quote any words showing that I think they are beneficial?

When I say that banning them would accomplish nothing but make people feel good, this is not defending them. I'm actually calling those who think it will make a difference misguided.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Bullets hit more than 500 people. That's a **** lot of people shot.
Of course it is. What do you expect to accomplish by stating the incredibly obvious? Why do you think spray and pray with a bump fire stock is more effective than aimed fire in semi-auto?

If you won't believe me, will you believe the Brady Campaign? I read an FAQ of theirs that claimed semi-auto assault weapons (like those targeted in the AWB of 1994) were more dangerous than actual machine guns. I can't find that quote, but I found this;
https://ourfuture.org/20151208/can-w...ssault-weapons
Quote:
The U.S. Army trains its soldiers that “the most important firing technique during fast-moving, modern combat is rapid semiautomatic fire.” Or as a veteran battlefield reporter explained:


[D]oes the infantry need full auto when most battle-seasoned veterans – including special operators – agree that semi-auto fire is highly effective for suppressing the enemy?… Back in the mid-1980s – before the shift to the M16A2 and the three-round burst – active-duty infantry units kept to a strict rule that rifleman only fired their M16A1s on semi auto. Today’s combat-experienced infantrymen are even more disciplined.

When soldiers fire M-16s in semi-auto, it is exactly the same as if they were firing AR-15s. Would there be a rifle more dangerous than the one our infantry uses in combat? No.
I know that the Vegas shooting was not fast moving combat, but I've no reason to believe that simply spraying bullets while bump firing is better than aimed fire in that scenario. Please tell me precisely why bump fire is more effective than aimed fire.

Last edited by Ranb; 6th October 2017 at 12:39 PM.
Ranb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 12:47 PM   #372
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 28,068
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
I was directing that comment towards you.
I've never claimed to compete in shooting events either.
__________________
All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 12:55 PM   #373
GlennB
In search of pi(e)
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pie City, Arcadia
Posts: 21,068
Originally Posted by Kestrel View Post
It helps sell ammunition. Nothing could be a higher priority for our freedom loving nation.

Last time I checked .223 rounds were at least $.50 each in bulk. Using bump fire to empty one 30 round magazine in 10 seconds costs about the same as going to a movie.
And when someone practices at that rate - out on the firing range, say - what exactly are they practicing for?? A whole army of rats scuttling by that need some some serious extermination effort? The Red Army invaders? Gubmint hordes coming to get their guns before putting them in FEMA camps?

Seriously. Well ...
__________________
"Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut
GlennB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 12:57 PM   #374
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 8,381
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
I've never claimed to compete in shooting events either.
I was telling you why people want to shoot quickly when target shooting.

Post #103
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
Why would one want to shoot that fast when target shooting?
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
When they want to compete in an event which scores them on speed and accuracy.
Ranb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 01:00 PM   #375
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 8,381
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
And when someone practices at that rate - out on the firing range, say - what exactly are they practicing for?? A whole army of rats scuttling by that need some some serious extermination effort? The Red Army invaders? Gubmint hordes coming to get their guns before putting them in FEMA camps?

Seriously. Well ...
Not directed at me, but seriously, you've never heard of competition for its own sake? Because it's fun?

Shooting is an Olympic sport, they even have a rapid fire event. Is it really beyond your imagination to think that shooting of any kind is fun?
Ranb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 01:07 PM   #376
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 13,107
Originally Posted by Metullus View Post
Need? Perhaps not. Do we really want to establish "need" as the principal test to determine whether or not people should be able to own something?
Nearly all societies do with some things.


It's just a question of what you restrict by need.
__________________
Some seem to think the UK leaving the EU is like Robbie leaving Take That.
In reality it's more like Pete leaving The Beatles.

We are lions, not tigers.
Turns out I don't know a lot about tigers.
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 02:37 PM   #377
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,576
Interesting history lesson:
Quote:
Yet we’ve also always had gun control. The Founding Fathers instituted gun laws so intrusive that, were they running for office today, the NRA would not endorse them. While they did not care to completely disarm the citizenry, the founding generation denied gun ownership to many people: not only slaves and free blacks, but law-abiding white men who refused to swear loyalty to the Revolution.

For those men who were allowed to own guns, the Founders had their own version of the “individual mandate” that has proved so controversial in President Obama’s health-care-reform law: they required the purchase of guns. A 1792 federal law mandated every eligible man to purchase a military-style gun and ammunition for his service in the citizen militia. Such men had to report for frequent musters—where their guns would be inspected and, yes, registered on public rolls.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...f-guns/308608/
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 04:39 PM   #378
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 15,991
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
In my opinion there would have been more casualties if he had used aimed rapid fire without bump firing.
I'm not so sure. You seem to be basing this on his ability to rapidly aim and fire, but the fact is that even the best and most trained gunmen would find their trigger finger cramping after a very short period. I doubt that there are very many, if any, people on the planet would could maintain a fire rate of 2 shots a second for 10 minutes if they were having to pull the trigger each and every time.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
My Apollo Page.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 04:47 PM   #379
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 28,068
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
I was telling you why people want to shoot quickly when target shooting.

Post #103
But you are questioning Hercules claim that he is a gun owner because he doesn't shoot in rapid succession.
__________________
All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 04:50 PM   #380
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 62,895
Originally Posted by Hellbound View Post
Actually, I have to agree with Ranb that aimed semi-auto would've likely produced as many casualties. Maybe not more, but that's easily a possibility.

My 25% reduction was an "at best" case, and was assuming he simply aimed, then started pulling the trigger as fast as possible (with no or minimal re-aiming between pulls).

Just fast trigger pulling on a semi-auto can achieve impressive rates of fire; I don't believe a bump stock would be 10x as many. Trigger pull could easily get you in the 120 to 240rounds per minute area.

Either way, I don't think it's necessarily central to this conversation.
So pulling a trigger a couple thousand times in the span of 10 minutes, think your finger would hold up, or do you think you would get tired?
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 04:50 PM   #381
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 28,068
Originally Posted by Metullus View Post
Who are they?
NRA members.
__________________
All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 04:52 PM   #382
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 62,895
Originally Posted by crescent View Post
Nice analogy.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 04:54 PM   #383
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 62,895
Originally Posted by Kestrel View Post
The average person doesn't have ninja level skills with firearms, knives or any other weapons.

It's also worth noting that an expert who can fire 30 rounds in a minute is unlikely to keep that rate up for a long period. The Las Vega shooter had no problems keeping up a high rate of fire for 11 or 12 minutes.
Exactly.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 04:58 PM   #384
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 8,381
The NRA thinks you're stupid

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/06/opinio...ter/index.html

Quote:
the NRA has announced and told their supporters in Congress that it is OK to support "some regulation" of bump stocks!
It is an amazing display of disingenuous and cynical political sleight of hand that, in a week in which America has seen death and maiming delivered rapid-fire in the most deadly mass shooting of Americans in modern history, the NRA grudgingly agrees that some regulation of these devices is OK.
The NRA's opinion on bump fire stocks is going to be like abortion; almost no one will be happy with it. Way too much or not enough.

But there is something else in the article that may be going over most people's heads. The author of the article, Michael A. Nutter, thinks you're stupid.
Quote:
Realizing the outrage of the American public that someone could take a cheap device known as a "bump stock" and convert a killing machine, an AR-15 rifle, into a weapon of mass destruction....
Yep, putting a heap piece of plastic on a small rifle turns it into a WMD. His evidence, none of course. But he has some supporters here on this forum. When a nut job like Paddock uses a slide fire stock to help him spray and pray into a crowd it seems too many people on the ISP and elsewhere just assume that a higher volume of fire (as opposed to aimed) is the sole reason so many people were injured/killed. If anyone suggests that aimed fire from an unmodified rifle would be as or more dangerous, it is hand waved away as nonsense.

I've talked about my experience with semi-auto rifles and bump firing. While it is anecdotal only, I'm not one prone to outrageous claims on the forum. My claims about the potentially impracticality of bump fire when it comes to effectively murdering a large number of people at 400 yards distance should not be dismissed out of hand either.

I would welcome a more experienced and expert opinion on bump fire. But it seems that it is hard to come by as those expert marksman who would be qualified to give an answer have not bothered to evaluate just how good or poor bump fire is at engaging large targets at long range.

He's not done though. He goes on to say;
Quote:
But, when someone buys and slowly accumulates 47 guns and rifles (12 with bump stocks), scopes, explosives and thousands of rounds of ammunition, no red flags go up. No questions asked.
I'm one of many people who have accumulated a sizable gun collection over the years. Just trying to discuss guns on this forum has lead to sexual harassment and suggestions that I'm involved in criminal activity or need to be medicated even though I'm very specific when it comes to talking about how I am careful to limit my activities to those that are legal. Mr. Nutter would be at home on this forum. Rational thinking until it came to talking about guns, then it's anything goes Clues Forum style.
Ranb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 05:11 PM   #385
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 62,895
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
What do you think the limit is? Is the limiting factor fatigue? I don't think I'd have any problem firing thirty 30-round magazines in ten minutes.


Yes really. Based on my experience with rapid firing an AR-15. If I was bump firing into the crowd at 400 yards I think I'd be missing the target area at times. With aimed semi-auto fire at the rate of 1-2 per second I could ensure every bullet went into the target zone.

Until I know more about how many rounds he expended and where those bullets went, I don't have any reason to believe his shooting was accurate enough to justify the higher rate of fire with the slide fire stock.
30 X 30 = 900

Not sure I buy your claim that 900 trigger pulls in 10 minutes is as easy as you claim.

Paddock had the ability to shoot 900 in 2 minutes and he fired more than that.

Not sure what you are defending here or why? Are you just digging your heels in because of where you started? Are you actually arguing we should allow automatic rifles? Are you arguing because the bump stock is just a hair short of true automatic it should be on the allowed side of the line?

NYT has a nice analysis comparing Las Vegas to Orlando fire power and speed.
Quote:
Nine Rounds a Second: How the Las Vegas Gunman Outfitted a Rifle to Fire Faster...

Authorities have not officially released details on the weapons a gunman used to kill 58 people and wound about 500 more late on Sunday in Las Vegas. ...

Las Vegas About 90 shots in 10 seconds...

Orlando nightclub shooting, in which 49 people were killed and 53 were wounded....

Orlando nightclub 24 shots in 9 seconds
They used audio analysis to arrive at those numbers. 102 vs ~558 is a pretty big spread and of course the Orlando incident lasted much longer.


By they way, the standard pro-gun arguments:
Liberals want more regulation because their goal is to outlaw guns
and
Murderers would just use another means to kill as many people therefore regulations are useless
are both old, tired and untrue arguments.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 6th October 2017 at 05:16 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 05:17 PM   #386
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 8,381
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
I'm not so sure. You seem to be basing this on his ability to rapidly aim and fire,
Yes I am. How good are you at keeping a sight picture through sights or a scope while the rifle is recoiling. With a 223 or 308 the sight picture is gone for me until I recover from the recoil and regain the target. It takes less than a second, but if I don't have the crosshair or front post on the target again, the next round is most likely going to be a miss.

Quote:
but the fact is that even the best and most trained gunmen would find their trigger finger cramping after a very short period. I doubt that there are very many, if any, people on the planet would could maintain a fire rate of 2 shots a second for 10 minutes if they were having to pull the trigger each and every time.
That is 1200 rounds; with a 30 round mag it is 39 brief breaks for mag changes, or 19 breaks for the larger 60 round mags. The shooter can also change sides; right to left. Prior to typing this post I pulled the trigger on one of my pistols which had a pull weight of at least six pounds. I pulled the trigger 1200 times, pausing every 30 pulls to simulate a magazine change. It took me about eight minutes. My trigger finger and forearm were sore, but it was not a real problem. I'm in my 50's and in only fair condition.

I think you're overestimating how difficult it is to pull a trigger. Even with slide fire, the finger has to maintain tension on the trigger as the barreled action rocks back and forth in the stock. Keeping constant tension the trigger is not as hard as pulling it all the time though.
Ranb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 05:30 PM   #387
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 8,381
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Not sure I buy your claim that 900 trigger pulls in 10 minutes is as easy as you claim.
Didn't say it was easy. I said I could do it. How about you stop exaggerating what I say when you criticize me.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Not sure what you are defending here or why?
You were more confident in your post above. You've still failed to quote my "defense" of slide fire stocks. How about you do so or stop?

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Are you just digging your heels in because of where you started?
I said bump fire sucks, aimed fire is better. Or did I start something else?

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Are you actually arguing we should allow automatic rifles?
I've not argued that in this thread.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Are you arguing because the bump stock is just a hair short of true automatic it should be on the allowed side of the line?
I have argued that bump fire is not full auto and thus not controlled by the NFA of 1934.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
NYT has a nice analysis comparing Las Vegas to Orlando fire power and speed. They used audio analysis to arrive at those numbers. 102 vs ~558 is a pretty big spread and of course the Orlando incident lasted much longer.
So?

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
So pulling a trigger a couple thousand times in the span of 10 minutes, think your finger would hold up, or do you think you would get tired?
My finger got tired and my forearm is still feeling the effects of doing it within the last hour. It was not a problem.

I'd really like to know more about why you think pulling a trigger as rapidly as I claim is not likely. You tried it yourself and failed? Surely you were able to perform a simple experiment like this even if you don't have access to a firearm.

Last edited by Ranb; 6th October 2017 at 05:39 PM.
Ranb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 05:36 PM   #388
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 8,381
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
But you are questioning Hercules claim that he is a gun owner because he doesn't shoot in rapid succession.
Hercules said in part; "Anyone who uses guns knows that a firearm will overheat if using a bump stock or a high capacity magazine, making target shooting pretty impossible."

That was a bold statement to make on a forum where some people have actually used high capacity magazines and rapidly shot their rifle without overheating it to the point where it no longer functioned well enough to hit a target. I'm just as likely to believe moonbat claims that rocket engines don't work in a vacuum as to believe that claim.

Last edited by Ranb; 6th October 2017 at 06:08 PM.
Ranb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 05:39 PM   #389
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 62,895
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
Didn't say it was easy. I said I could do it. How about you stop exaggerating what I say when you criticize me.


You were more confident in your post above. You've still failed to quote my "defense" of slide fire stocks. How about you do so or stop?


I said bump fire sucks, aimed fire is better. Or did I start something else?


I've not argued that in this thread.


I have argued that bump fire is not full auto and thus not controlled by the NFA of 1934.


So?
Sorry you are annoyed but you are confusing my questions asking you to clarify just what you are arguing with me accusing you of something.

You are defending the bump stocks for reasons I don't understand. Maybe you don't believe your posts read like you are arguing for legalized automatic weapons.

What is your point?

Bump stocks are currently legal? I think we know that.

Bump stocks made no difference or decreased the fatality rate? That's crap no matter how many times you can fire a semi-automatic without a fatigued finger.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 05:49 PM   #390
Elagabalus
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,674
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/06/opinio...ter/index.html ... When a nut job like Paddock uses a slide fire stock to help him spray and pray into a crowd it seems too many people on the ISP and elsewhere just assume that a higher volume of fire (as opposed to aimed) is the sole reason so many people were injured/killed. If anyone suggests that aimed fire from an unmodified rifle would be as or more dangerous, it is hand waved away as nonsense...
No, I'm saying that an inexperienced shooter can match the rate of fire of an experienced shooter much easier with a slide fire stock and would be more inclined to use one to perpetrate mass murder like in LV. Keep in mind that people who commit such crimes are probably not so concerned about target accuracy as they are about inflicting terror in their potential targets.

Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
... I would welcome a more experienced and expert opinion on bump fire. But it seems that it is hard to come by as those expert marksman who would be qualified to give an answer have not bothered to evaluate just how good or poor bump fire is at engaging large targets at long range...
Unfortunately, not long range but it's what I could find:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE



Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
...I'm one of many people who have accumulated a sizable gun collection over the years. Just trying to discuss guns on this forum has lead to sexual harassment and suggestions that I'm involved in criminal activity or need to be medicated even though I'm very specific when it comes to talking about how I am careful to limit my activities to those that are legal. Mr. Nutter would be at home on this forum. Rational thinking until it came to talking about guns, then it's anything goes Clues Forum style.
That is unfortunate. I hope the people involved were banned from this forum.
Elagabalus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 05:54 PM   #391
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 8,381
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Sorry you are annoyed but you are confusing my questions asking you to clarify just what you are arguing with me accusing you of something.
You claim I'm defending bump fire when I'm actually criticizing it. Why can't you show me where I was defending bump fire?

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
You are defending the bump stocks for reasons I don't understand.
Your failure to understand is because I'm not actually defending them.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Maybe you don't believe your posts read like you are arguing for legalized automatic weapons.
I don't have to, automatic weapons are already legal.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Bump stocks made no difference or decreased the fatality rate?
Where are you getting that from? Some people on the forum suggest (without evidence) that bump stocks increase the fatality rate. I'm suggesting based on my experience with aimed fire and bump fire that aimed fire is more lethal in some cases.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
That's crap no matter how many times you can fire a semi-automatic without a fatigued finger.
Actually I claimed that aimed fire may be more effective than bump fire because accuracy trumps volume. I based it on my personal experience. You're basing your conclusions on something else and won't say what it is.

So what evidence do you have that bump fire is more lethal than aimed fire?

I can go either way, but because my experience with slide fire stocks leads me to believe that they are a hindrance to effective shooting, I'm not going to change my opinion until I get better data or evidence. What do you have to show me?

Last edited by Ranb; 6th October 2017 at 06:07 PM.
Ranb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 06:05 PM   #392
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 8,381
Originally Posted by Elagabalus View Post
No, I'm saying that an inexperienced shooter can match the rate of fire of an experienced shooter much easier with a slide fire stock and would be more inclined to use one to perpetrate mass murder like in LV. Keep in mind that people who commit such crimes are probably not so concerned about target accuracy as they are about inflicting terror in their potential targets.
If Paddock wanted to just kill dozens of people, he accomplished it no question. I'm just surprised that people are making a huge deal about bump fire like it's some sort of monster that was unleashed on the nation when it is actually more of a waste of money and ammo in my opinion.

Originally Posted by Elagabalus View Post
Unfortunately, not long range but it's what I could find:
Interesting video. It shows that in this case bump fire may degrade accuracy. But Miculek is going to out shoot just about anyone on the planet anyway.

Originally Posted by Elagabalus View Post
That is unfortunate. I hope the people involved were banned from this forum.
They were not.

Last edited by Ranb; 6th October 2017 at 06:19 PM.
Ranb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 07:20 PM   #393
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 17,737
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
I'm just surprised that people are making a huge deal about bump fire like it's some sort of monster that was unleashed on the nation when it is actually more of a waste of money and ammo in my opinion.
America and the world just saw a monster unleashed for the first time and it has a voice that everyone heard. It sounds just like a machine gun. A terrible sound. It destroyed almost 60 people and tore up hundreds more.

To you it's a waste of money and ammo. That doesn't matter at all because America saw a monster unleashed.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 07:22 PM   #394
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 6,459
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
I'd really like to know more about why you think pulling a trigger as rapidly as I claim is not likely. You tried it yourself and failed? Surely you were able to perform a simple experiment like this even if you don't have access to a firearm.
IMO, many people really underestimate just how long a second is. Seriously, playing rimshot 1/8th notes and paradiddles on a snare or a high-hat is harder than pulling a trigger three times every two seconds (900 in 10 minutes)

FF to 3:40 to skip all the talk....
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
__________________
► 9/11 was a terrorist attack by Islamic extremists; 12 Apollo astronauts really did walk on the Moon; JFK was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald,who acted alone.
► Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed. - Jay Utah
► Heisenberg's Law - The weirdness of the Universe is inversely proportional to the scale at which you observe it, or not.
smartcooky is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 07:27 PM   #395
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 8,381
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
That doesn't matter at all because America saw a monster unleashed.
And now the NRA and others are going to agree to restrictions on the stupid slide fire stocks like it will make a difference. Let's say slide fire stocks are banned outright or regulated by the NFA of 1934, what changes?

The semi-auto rifles are still out there. A maniac can still rapidly bump fire one or aim it properly instead. Like I said before, banning a slide fire stock is just as meaningless as banning the black anodizing on the rifles.

Last edited by Ranb; 6th October 2017 at 07:38 PM.
Ranb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 07:30 PM   #396
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 8,381
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
IMO, many people really underestimate just how long a second is. Seriously, playing rimshot 1/8th notes and paradiddles on a snare or a high-hat is harder than pulling a trigger three times every two seconds (900 in 10 minutes)
"A person can't pull the trigger that fast or that long" Am I reading the ISF forum or some CT crap on Facebook or Sept Clues? Sad to see it's both.

I suppose I could make a video of myself or another person shooting an AR-15 that fast and that long. I have an old chrome lined barrel I don't mind ruining. 1000 rounds of reloaded ammo is going to cost me about $180 though. If I do it, I should set up a target to simulate the area Paddock was aiming at and shoot it with a slide fire stock equipped Ar-15 and one without just to see for myself how they compare.

Last edited by Ranb; 6th October 2017 at 07:37 PM.
Ranb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 07:59 PM   #397
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 17,737
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
And now the NRA and others are going to agree to restrictions on the stupid slide fire stocks like it will make a difference. Let's say slide fire stocks are banned outright or regulated by the NFA of 1934, what changes?
What changes is that America would then believe that it will not see or hear that monster again.

It was dozens of pocket cameras that allowed us to see and hear that unleashed horrible hungry monster. That matters because it's one thing to read about it and very much another to actually see and hear it devouring so many people in one sitting.

Quote:
The semi-auto rifles are still out there. A maniac can still rapidly bump fire one or aim it properly instead.
That's a different monster which we haven't seen or heard eat up so many people. If something similar happens with a bare-hands-only-bump-fired-rifle then we will have another discussion about that other unleashed monster.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 08:05 PM   #398
BobTheCoward
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 9,344
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
That matters because it's one thing to read about it and very much another to actually see and hear it devouring so many people in one sitting.
No, there is no difference between the two. For those that have different reactions, they are either bad at empathy or morons.

This is the same garbage with the Ray rice video.
BobTheCoward is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 08:24 PM   #399
Dabop
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Oz
Posts: 395
Thumbs up

Originally Posted by crescent View Post

Quote:
A village has been built in the deepest gully of a floodplain.

At regular intervals, flash floods wipe away houses, killing all inside. Less dramatic—but more lethal—is the steady toll as individual villagers slip and drown in the marshes around them.

After especially deadly events, the villagers solemnly discuss what they might do to protect themselves. Perhaps they might raise their homes on stilts? But a powerful faction among the villagers is always at hand to explain why these ideas won’t work. “No law can keep our village safe! The answer is that our people must learn to be better swimmers - and oh by the way, you said ‘stilts’ when the proper term is ‘piles,’ so why should anybody listen to you?”

So the argument rages, without result, year after year, decade after decade, fatalities mounting all the while. Nearby villages, built in the hills, marvel that the gully-dwellers persist in their seemingly reckless way of life. But the gully-dwellers counter that they are following the wishes of their Founders, whose decisions two centuries ago must always be upheld by their descendants.

Probably the most apt post I've seen to date
__________________
It's a kind of a strawman thing in that it's exactly a strawman thing. Loss Leader
Dabop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2017, 08:30 PM   #400
BobTheCoward
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 9,344
Originally Posted by Dabop View Post
Probably the most apt post I've seen to date
You left off one important factor. The villagers are generally content with their choice.
BobTheCoward is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

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
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:12 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.