OK...you keep believing in magic guns and bullets, I stay firmly rooted in the real world. Sound fair?
On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Eric Roberts <ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: > > If you fire a .50 cal rifle (they are used as sniper rifles) you dont move > a bit because you have more leverage. It's why you can fire a .50 cal > machine gun without ending up in the next county after a few rounds. Now if > you were to take a 50 cal and try and Rambo it...yeah...you are going to get > thrown back as the recoil on it isn't designed to absorb the energy. A .50 > cal rifle, on the other hand, has recoil spring to absorb some of that > energy directed back at you so the bullet will effectively have more of a > punch than the rifle but will have on your shoulder...same goes with a > m1911...re recoil springs and venting cause it to have less of a blowback, > energy wise, than the bullet has punching power if that makes sense. Just > for sake of argument, the bullet may exert 500 lbs of pressure on the target > it hits, while you may only feel 50 lbs of pressure on your body from firing > it because of venting and the recoil mechanisms. The energy coming back at > you is absorbed by springs or vented and thus deflected in a different > direction thus lessening it's effect on you. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Stroz [mailto:boyz...@gmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2010 12:52 PM > To: cf-community > Subject: Re: Daily Kos: Why liberals should love the Second Amendment > > > IIRC, the biggest gun they tested was a .50 caliber rifle. > > I do not have to fire a gun to know that any bullets it shoots cannot > defy the laws of physics. > > On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 11:05 AM, Eric Roberts > <ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: >> >> Again...you obviously have never fired an m1911. The force the round > exudes >> when it hits a target is pretty intense. I dont know what weapons they >> tested on Mythbusters (I would certainly like to see the episode), but > they >> obviously didn't test the m1911. When you fire it, it has a pretty hard >> kick that causes your hands to go back and the gun to go up. That is one > of >> the several reasons why it is so accurate because you have to totally > re-aim >> for the next shot. Part of it is also because the round is so huge. It > is >> pretty useless at a distance, but close range, it packs a punch. Id dont >> know if any of the other vets here used it as I think they are all much >> younger than me and probably would have used the 9mm handgun the military >> adopted. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Scott Stroz [mailto:boyz...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2010 9:19 AM >> To: cf-community >> Subject: Re: Daily Kos: Why liberals should love the Second Amendment >> >> >> Had to look it up, could not think of the reference at the time that >> proves this is physically imposible, its Newton's Third Law of Motion >> >> On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Scott Stroz <boyz...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> OK, earlier you said it it would 'knock him back a few feet'...that is >>> physically impossible, without the shooter also getting knocked back a >>> few feet. 'knock them on their ass' is quite a bit different than >>> 'knock him back a few feet'. :D >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 9:45 AM, Eric Roberts >>> <ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> I guess you have never fired an m1911...it's doesn't knock you back at >> all. >>>> The army adopted the handgun during the Philippine Insurrection when the >>>> Philippine Moros, who were hopped up on drugs, would keep on charging >> when >>>> hit by the revolvers that were previously used. The .45 cal round that >> the >>>> m1911 fired hit them and knocked them on their ass so they wouldn't get >> back >>>> up. The handgun was used up until the late 80's/early 90's when it was >>>> replaced by the much less powerful (and more accurate at greater >> distances) >>>> 9mm. >>>> >>>> Eric >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Scott Stroz [mailto:boyz...@gmail.com] >>>> Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2010 7:21 AM >>>> To: cf-community >>>> Subject: Re: Daily Kos: Why liberals should love the Second Amendment >>>> >>>> >>>> Any weapon that will knock the bad guy back a few feet will also knock >>>> you back a few feet. I know this because I saw it in Mythbusters. :D >>>> >>>> On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 12:01 AM, Eric Roberts >>>> <ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> If I were to have a firearm for self defense, I'll take the m1911 any >> day. >>>>> Screw the little 9mm handguns...I want something that would not only >> kill >>>> my >>>>> opponent, but knock him back a few feet ;-) Which is one of the > reasons >> I >>>>> won't own one. I wasn't trained to injure. I was trained to shoot to >> kill >>>>> (one shot one kill as the saying went) and I really don't want to be > put >>>> in >>>>> that situation. I'll give my opponent a fighting chance and stick to >>>> blades >>>>> ;-) >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Robert Munn [mailto:cfmuns...@gmail.com] >>>>> Sent: Saturday, July 10, 2010 1:49 AM >>>>> To: cf-community >>>>> Subject: Re: Daily Kos: Why liberals should love the Second Amendment >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I could go for either of those, or maybe the M4 shotgun. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 8:49 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox >>>>> <zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I've got the Remington 870 Express. >>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 10:16 PM, Scott Stroz <boyz...@gmail.com> > wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We have a Benelli SuperNova tactical shotgun. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >> > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology-Michael-Dinowitz/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:322859 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
