I think you need to understand physics. There is no gun that can be held by one person, that when fired at another person, will knock that other person back a few feet. (Maybe a rail gun could do it, but I do not think there are any hand held rail guns...yet) If there is such a gun, I am sure you can find some video somewhere that proves me wrong. My challenge to you is to find such proof.
On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 6:14 PM, Eric Roberts <ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: > > I think you need to study how guns work. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Stroz [mailto:boyz...@gmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2010 4:08 PM > To: cf-community > Subject: Re: Daily Kos: Why liberals should love the Second Amendment > > > 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:322864 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
