Posted on 06/08/2013 8:48:34 AM PDT by Innovative
A semi-automatic assault rifle is again being tied to a US mass shooting, this one a chaotic series of events led by a body-armor-clad man who killed four and wounded five people before being shot and killed by police in a college library in the iconic beachside city of Santa Monica, Calif.
The attack marked the first major mass shooting since a bipartisan gun control bill failed in the US Senate in April. The shooting may help efforts to revive the debate about gun control, as well as put focus on ongoing legislative action in some states around allowing students and faculty to carry weapons on campuses to help thwart active shooters who target what are usually so-called "gun free" zones.
AR-15s and other semi-automatic rifles are used in far fewer homicides than hand guns, but have become symbolic of America’s struggle to contain violent and public mass shootings. They’re immensely popular because of their ease-of-use, accuracy and customizability. Critics argue that the rifles are designed to be militaristic and offensive. Fans of the guns say they have no more lethality than a standard hunting rifle.
(Excerpt) Read more at csmonitor.com ...
Notice these mass shootings seem to always happen in “gun free” zones.
And it's just as dangerous a myth that concealed-carry folks cannot disable a bad guy who's wearing body armor. If the concealed carrier has a big enough load, like a .45, they can knock the guy to the ground. Again, the folks I see here arguing otherwise who present themselves as "experts," make me very suspicious because I know they are lying. WHY are they lying?
“STOP with your disgusting propaganda trying to deceive people that there’s no defense against body armor. THERE IS.”
Good grief! Chill out!
But no, the impact of a 45 acp will NOT blow the guy off his feet. You and your friend need to leave TV land.
http://youtu.be/4MPSDjJQIv4?t=1m55s
The force exerted by the bullet on the target is, to first order, determined by the mass of the bullet multiplied by its acceleration, which would be negative as it slows down on impact. The force exerted on the shooter is also, to first order, determined by the same mass multiplied by its acceleration over the length of the barrel. The time part of the equation, and hence the value of the acceleration is much larger for the shooter than the target. So the force is less.
For typical body armor the deacceleration forces are quite high.
You are the one living in TV land -- when is the last time you shot at steel targets the way that guy is doing in that video? The way that I do pretty much every month? BECAUSE I've shot .45s and 12 gauge shotguns so frequently at steel targets in company with fellows every bit as informed and knowledgeable as this guy in your video, I know that even a BIG guy in body armor, hit in quick succession with three or four rounds from a .45, would very probably be on the ground. Still alive and unwounded, but off his feet or at the very least well off his balance.
You are full of crap.
The force on the shooter is also lessened by the mass of the gun, the spring in the slide and the surface area of the hand on the grip which is a good deal larger than the surface area of the nose of a bullet. There is also some shock absorbing effect of the wrist, elbow and shoulder joints supported by ligaments and muscle as opposed to the direct impact of a bullet on relatively static flesh and bone.
There was a time I'd have defaulted to the "just talking shi'ite instead of lying" assumption. But frankly, after so many years of seeing true honest-to-goodness disinformation efforts on FR, I no longer default to that assumption. If guys like Mr. Rogers can convince people that there's no defense against body armor, it makes those people more conditioned to roll over to government tyranny out of helplessness. I at least suspect there's a possibility that such folks are shills.
You just never know, that’s for sure! ;-)
ALL OF THESE GUYS laughed when I, outraged at the time, told them about the "experts" on this forum who assured fellow FReepers that that shooter in Aurora, Colorado, couldn't have been stopped because of his body armor. Every one of them said that the impact from a .45, and for sure the rapid succession of impacts from a .45, on that body armor (no "head shot" involved) would 99 percent likely unbalance and knock down the shooter long enough to overpower him. They don't "live in TV land."
“If guys like Mr. Rogers can convince people that there’s no defense against body armor, it makes those people more conditioned to roll over to government tyranny out of helplessness. I at least suspect there’s a possibility that such folks are shills.”
Were you born a paranoid freak, or did you spend years becoming one?
You and your gun shop ninjas are stupid as well as paranoid. Ever shot a deer? Did the deer get blown off its feet by a 30-06?
The steel plates in the video were basically steel skillets, free hanging and shot at the lower lip for maximum effect. Did any of them flip over? If a 44 magnum (which I shoot regularly) doesn’t even flip a free-hanging skillet over, do you REALLY think it will blow a bad guy off his feet?
Do you think the FBI trains their agents not to count on someone WITHOUT armor going down because they are stupid? Are you familiar with the Miami shootout that led the FBI to adopting the 10mm?
I can’t stop you from living in a fantasy world, but I wish you wouldn’t spew your ballistic baloney on FR...
Mostly ignorant of actual point of impact ballistics and energy transfer.
That is why when you watch a sniper using a .50 against a taliban perched on a hillside far away, the sniper recoil moves his shoulder a few inches, and the target actually cartwheels through the air end over end. Oh, wait.
“the target actually cartwheels through the air end over end”
Really? Please tell me that was sarcasm...
I also guess you know more than LAPD officers who've in real life gone up against bad guys (have you?), I guess you know more than firearms trainers with former Special Forces experience, all of whom would laugh in your face.
No, I wasn't born a paranoid freak. But the older I get and the more I see on forums such as this one, the more I realize that, just like there really and truly are freaks who will take a gun into a theater and start shooting, there really are political agents of disinformation. Because I know for a fact that you are dead wrong and that what you claim has the ultimate result of convincing people that guns won't protect them, I can't help but be sensible enough to at least consider the possibility that you're a shill.
“I also guess you know more than LAPD officers who’ve in real life gone up against bad guys (have you?), I guess you know more than firearms trainers with former Special Forces experience, all of whom would laugh in your face.”
Odd. My son-in-law killed a number of people in Iraq, and he agrees with me. And no, I’ve never met a cop who thought I was wrong. I know of very few deer blown off their feet. Most ran some ways.
Of course, deer don’t wear bullet proof vests, but more than one has absorbed all the energy from a 30-06 without being knocked down or staggered.
Did you bother to read what the FBI teaches their agents? Did you understand any of it? Or did you blow it off because your “truly expert firearms professional friends” think the FBI is stupid?
And what makes you think the 45 is magic? Why a 45, and not a 357? Is that the flavor of the month among your gun shop gurus?
The Christian Scientist Monitor has been whacko liberal since I can remember.
MSNBC is describing him as a “White Male”, which he well may be, BUT to have that description and not list his name is HIGHLY misleading(if he turns out to be Muslim. Of course, misleading the public is what that network does 24/7.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.