Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: DugwayDuke

This is funny! But it is New Jersey.

There IS a difference between handgun and rifle ammo, once one gets above .22 caliber. The reason is that the long barrel of a rifle allows time for a larger propellant charge to be effective. The bullet should be accelerating all during its travel through the bore. In a pistol, there is not such a long travel-time in the barrel, so a large charge in an elongate cartridge makes little sense.

Really bizarre pistols are now being made which use certain rifle cartridges. From the standpoint of realistic design, these things are a joke, and an inefficient joke. I saw one of those weapons which has a tiny, short barrel, perhaps about 1 cm long. The barrel was much shorter than the cartridge itself! It means that most of the powder in the gigantic cartridge is being wasted, and goes only to make much smoke and noise.

The pending NJ bill is just as stupid, and has nothing to do with officer safety.

If the state were interested really in public safety, they would issue pistol carry permits to law abiding citizens, as is done in about three-quarters of the states; and then they could watch the crime rates drop. It is not a particular style of gun or cartridge which threatens police officers: it is criminals who threaten them, and criminals also threaten everyone else. The courts in NJ made this mess, and they must be reformed for the protection of everyone.

It is interesting that back in the days of Gov. Christie Whitman (a liberal, or RINO), a law was passed allowing retired policemen to have pistol-carry permits. The stated purpose was to have more good guys around who were armed, and thus increase public safety. Actually, this was a perfectly good idea, and it is now law. Well, there is very little difference between a superannuated, retired policeman and me. Arm qualified citizens, and you get the same effect. That is what NJ should be doing.

I am not an extremist about this: I favor permitting, and I think training would be a good thing. (I wish drivers were better trained!) But the point is, the more armed lawful people, the better the protection from the criminal elements.


15 posted on 01/28/2012 6:57:13 AM PST by docbnj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: docbnj

“There IS a difference between handgun and rifle ammo, once one gets above .22 caliber.”

You are correct in that a longer barrel allows the powder to burn more completely and provides for larger muzzle velocities.

It is not always the case that a difference exists between handgun and rifle ammunition. Take for example the 44 Magnum. There are many different rifles and pistols chambered for that round. Same cartridge case, same bullets, and same powder loads regardless of whether it is to be fired from a rifle or a pistol. Yes, the muzzle velocities are different.

The reason for the ‘sameness’ is product liability. The makers of ammunition will not sell a cartridge that isn’t safe in all guns chambered for that cartridge. (Ok, some exceptions but it’s a pretty general rule.)

But of more relevence to the topic, most of the handguns chambered for rifle cartridges are single shot, have a very long barrel (for a pistol), and are very specialized, ie, target shooting or unique hunting applications. The idea that they would be a weapon of choice for a criminal is ludicrous.

This law is nothing more than the typical gun grabber attempt at banning firearms and ammunition using the salami slice. Ban a few here, ban a few there, and pretty soon you ban them all. In this case, you can find a single shot pistol with a 10 to 14 inch barrel chambered for most of the common rifle cartridges. In fact, many of these firearms allow you to fire cartridges of different caliber by switching barrels. If passed, this law would, in effect, ban ammunition for almost all hunting rifles. (I’ve even seen one in 45-70, think buffalo hunting.)

BTW, this is similar to the way Mexico bans almost all firearms. Their laws only ban ‘military’ firearms. But, they interpret that law in this way. If somewhere in the world at some time, a military adopted a particular cartridge, then that cartridge is a military cartridge and all firearms that fire that cartridge are military firearms and are banned.


20 posted on 01/28/2012 9:18:39 AM PST by DugwayDuke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson