23 Dec

Exactly what is “high capacity ammunition”???

Mr. LaPierre offered no support for any of the proposals made in the last week, like banning assault rifles or limiting high-capacity ammunition…

Just One Minute

       

About DrJohn

DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education. DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed. Except for liberals being foolish.

12 Responses to Exactly what is “high capacity ammunition”???

  1. well when you run on emotion and no logic accountability or reason, its unnecessary to have actual facts.

    ReplyReply
  2. Randy says: 2

    Lefties don’t need no stinking facts! Lefties make up their own facts as they need them. Then they repeat them often enought until they actually believe them!

    ReplyReply
  3. Petercat says: 3

    Emotions, distortions, and outright lies.
    My favorite obfuscatory phrases used by liberals regarding firearms are:

    (1): “High powered assault rifles”
    I won’t get into the “assault rifle” claims, but the part about their being “high powered”?
    Most of the so-called “assault rifles” in civilian hands fire either the .223, 5.56mm NATO, or the 7.62(7.65)x39mm round, three of the least powerful rifle rounds in existence today. There are a handful that are weaker, there are many, many that are more powerful.

    (2) “Military ammunition designed to kill”
    No, military ammunition is designed to wound, which on the battlefield is more desirable than killing.
    If you kill an enemy soldier, you take one man out of the fight. If you wound him instead, you take two or three men out of the fight- him and one or two of his buddies who have to stop fighting long enough to help him.

    (3) “Designed to rip huge, gaping holes in people”
    Again referencing military ammunition. Not true. The 5.56mm and 7.62 (7.65)mm generally drill small holes straight through human bodies. They don’t expand, and, contrary to modern myth, they usually don’t tumble. (It takes roughly 1/2000th of a second to pass through a human body, how much tumbling can it do in that time?) Even if they hit a bone, well, bones are softer than those little fast-moving pointy things. They generally drill straight through.

    ReplyReply
  4. Randy says: 4

    @Petercat: You are right on with the science. Unfortunately, lefties make up their own science. Just look at the climate change “facts” they spew!

    ReplyReply
  5. how come they are put in power by the ignorants and unions,
    they are doing nothing to help keep society safe from their own criminals,
    they always depend on the CONSERVATIVES TO BAIL THEM OUT, JUST LIKE HE DEPEND ON BOEMER TO FIX HIS OWN SELF MADE CLIFF, AND HE DON’T WANT TO GIVE UP HIS SPENDING SPREE
    WHEN BOEMER SAY THIS IS THE PROBLEM,
    HE WILL DO THE SAME WITH THE KILLER MASS MURDER PROBLEM WHICH MR LaPierre put on his face,
    with the smartest speech topping any other done from the massacre, talking heads,
    they don’t want to be told the truth, they just want to be told lies convinient for their public image.
    again just like he want concerning the CLIFF.

    ReplyReply
  6. Hard Right says: 6

    @Randy:

    And no matter how many times you prove their claims to be completely wrong, they insist on repeating it over and over. tom is a prime example.

    ReplyReply
  7. Hard Right says: 7

    I have sat near some anti-gun types who tried to top each other on firearms ignorance/bigotry.
    One mentioned they knew nothing about guns. Another said they knew nothing and wanted to know nothing. The other said they hated guns, and the last said they were disgusted by gun owners.
    Had I not heard it myself I would have thought such people didn’t exist. They view ignorance and bigotry towards firearms and their owners as a badge of goodness.

    On another ocassion I had a friend’s mother tell me that people who carry guns are bad people. She was married to a crackhead who mistreated her daughter, but she refused to leave him or protect her daughter.

    I have had 4 New Yorkers tell me that people who carry guns are looking for trouble. I used to dislike the term “sheeple”. Now I understand it and it certainly applies to many anti-gunners.

    ReplyReply
  8. Hard Right
    you’re in my book ALWAYS,
    MERRY CHRISTMAS

    ReplyReply
  9. Uncle Bill says: 9

    Petercat: I agree with most of what you say, but you are incorrect about the 5.56 round tumbling. It is designed to do exactly that. Projectiles spin (that is the purpose of barrel rifling) to make them stable in flight. The 5.56 round has what is known as “neutral stability,” meaning it is barely stable in flight. As soon as it hits something, it loses that stability, and starts to tumble. This is actually one of the very clever aspects of the design of the M-16, because it means the projectile delivers the most energy, and hence does the most damage. (It was also the cause of some complaints, because hitting something as insignificant as a leaf would cause it to tumble, too, and lose accuracy.)

    Ironically, the Russians tried) to have the 5.56 round declared illegal under the Geneva convention, because it is so lethal.

    ReplyReply
  10. Petercat says: 10

    @Uncle Bill: #9
    Uncle Bill,
    That was the case when the 5.56mm round was first developed, but in 1977, when it was accepted by NATO as a standard caliber, M16 platform weapons went to a “shorter” rifling for increased stability, 1 in 7 or 9 instead of 1 in 12, I believe. The bullet, which had been a 55gr lead core, went to a 62gr steel core for greater long-range penetration.
    Ballistic tests have shown that the bullets from the 5.56mm NATO round may break up or fragment, but they do not normally tumble.
    The M855 round:
    http://www.firearmstactical.com/images/Wound%20Profiles/M855.jpg
    The M193 round:
    http://www.firearmstactical.com/images/Wound%20Profiles/M193.jpg

    The Russians did, in fact, try it themselves with the 5.45x39mm cartridge used in the AK-74. When introduced, the USA tried to vilify it as a demonic cartridge because it did, in fact, tumble:
    http://www.firearmstactical.com/images/Wound%20Profiles/AK-74%20545×39.jpg
    The reason for the success of this round was it’s construction. It consisted of a copper jacket with a steel core at the rear, an air space in the nose. Very stable in flight, upon impact the steel core would move forward, destabilizing the bullet and causing it to tumble.

    ReplyReply
  11. Petercat
    don’t forget the apple for SILVER, BEST TO YOU AND YOUR FAMILY FOR THE HOLLYDAYS

    ReplyReply
  12. Petercat says: 12

    @ilovebeeswarzone:
    Same to you, Bees!
    Silver’s moved into my spare bedroom for the winter. I’m glad he’s housebroken…
    And he eats like… well, like a horse.
    Apples are scarce around here, but he likes Fruit Loops.

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

 

Switch to our mobile site