Rep Massie posts gun photo

#802
#802
Vol8188 said:
They should be forced to wear a rubber band at all times extending from their index finger to their pinky that will create resist and slow their rate of fire back down to x
Click to expand...
I like the speed limit idea. Maybe guns should come with attached metronomes. Each state can then set its own MFR (maximum fire rate) and give tickets to anyone with a heavy finger.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad, volfanhill, NorthDallas40 and 2 others
#803
#803
kiddiedoc said:
I like the speed limit idea. Maybe guns should come with attached metronomes. Each state can then set its own MFR (maximum fire rate) and give tickets to anyone with a heavy finger.
Click to expand...

Now you’re thinking . What we need is more revenue. It doesn’t matter that the wealth of all American billionaires is less than our budget or that it’s less than build back better alone. We need revenue!
 
#804
#804
hndog609 said:
True of basically any repeating weapon; revolver, lever, pump, whatever.

Don't worry, he's got all kinds of levels of stupid lined up to try and make us forget he wanted to redefine a mechanism by parameters unrelated to it's functional description. That nonsense was tantamount to defining the difference between an automatic vs a manual car transmission by speed and braking measurements.
Click to expand...

He’ll be wanting to put governors on bicycles.
 
#808
#808
Vol8188 said:
We have a line. The line is automatic weapons. I’m also assuming we agree that eliminating any arbitrary DUI limits wouldn’t change anything
Click to expand...
That would be a horrible assumption.
I've noticed you love that tactic.
I assume you agree that it is ineffective.
But I do love the fact that you agree a line must be drawn.
 
#809
#809
luthervol said:
That would be a horrible assumption.
I've noticed you love that tactic.
I assume you agree that it is ineffective.
But I do love the fact that you agree a line must be drawn.
Click to expand...

I only go to that when you openly ignore questions. If you don’t ignore them, I wouldn’t have to assume. You never have to assume with me Luther, I always directly state my stance and will happily answer clarifying questions
 
#811
#811
Vol8188 said:
I only go to that when you openly ignore questions. If you don’t ignore them, I wouldn’t have to assume. You never have to assume with me Luther, I always directly state my stance and will happily answer clarifying questions
Click to expand...
As do I.
That would put us in the vast minority.
So you agree that there are legal limits already in place that do not conflict with 2a.
 
#812
#812
luthervol said:
As do I.
That would put us in the vast minority.
So you agree that there are legal limits already in place that do not conflict with 2a.
Click to expand...

I would agree some do not and some do. Depends on the exact limit. There’s no limit on rounds per second because that’s a user thing. As has been demonstrated, a skilled user can fire a revolver, lever action, pump, etc at a very fast rate.

And no you’re not apart of that minority you hide constantly and refuse to address direct questions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#814
#814
Luther besides the operator what variables do you think impact rounds fired/time?

Do you believe if you factor out the operator there is great variance in rounds/time fired?
 
#815
#815
Vol8188 said:
I would agree some do not and some do. Depends on the exact limit. There’s no limit on rounds per second because that’s a user thing. As has been demonstrated, a skilled user can fire a revolver, lever action, pump, etc at a very fast rate.

And no you’re not apart of that minority you hide constantly and refuse to address direct questions.
Click to expand...
Your last part is complete bs.
I willingly and continuously put myself in a position to get grilled in the PF.
I have never once knowingly avoided any question. Why would I?
Hide? Are you nuts?
On the open and willing to answer any question continuum, I'm far above you.
I assume you de realize that and agree.
 
#818
#818
Vol8188 said:
I would agree some do not and some do. Depends on the exact limit. There’s no limit on rounds per second because that’s a user thing. As has been demonstrated, a skilled user can fire a revolver, lever action, pump, etc at a very fast rate.

And no you’re not apart of that minority you hide constantly and refuse to address direct questions.
Click to expand...
I can put as many rounds on target in a minute with my k31 straight pull as most can with an ar15. And I’ve only got 10 shots per magazine to the ARs 30. You can get really good with a bolt action or lever gun if you practice
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol8188
#819
#819
Orangeslice13 said:
I can put as many rounds on target in a minute with my k31 straight pull as most can with an ar15. And I’ve only got 10 shots per magazine to the ARs 30. You can get really good with a bolt action or lever gun if you practice
Click to expand...

it gets to my questions (unanswered as of yet) to Luther. if the metric is simply rate of fire with no concerns over on target or over how long a time then I'd argue that rate of fire doesn't vary by much at all and thus it wouldn't be a meaningful metric.

now rounds fired in a specified period of time (eg. 1 minute) is going to vary more due to magazine size and ability of the gun to not overheat/fail but this is not rate of fire. likewise two guns that could be fired equally quickly (not uncommon) might vary pretty significantly in ability to keep those shots on target due more to recoil, etc.

in short, rate of fire from one semi to another shouldn't vary that much if we are only trying to measure number of times a trigger can be pulled/second. It's a ridiculous definition of "semi-automatic" and it's a meaningless metric in regulating guns.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeslice13
#820
#820
luthervol said:
That's why everyone hated my solution.
Define semi as the capability to fire more than x rounds in y seconds.
You could even have more than one category.
Cat 1. Less than x rounds in y seconds
Cat 2. Between x and z rounds in y seconds
Cat 3. More than z rounds in y seconds.

I don't see why anyone would have an issue with that - (just kidding, I know)
Click to expand...
That doesnt make any sense.

Not only do you want to arbitrarily change the meaning of "semi", you also want to change the meaning of "automatic". And you want change it to things that dont have a single thing to do with what you are trying to redefine.

Like I said self enforced ignorance, and you congratulate yourself on the magnitude of your ignorance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad and Rickyvol77
#821
#821
luthervol said:
I think people are more interested in fire rate.
What's wrong with also classifying guns that way?
Click to expand...
How would you ever classify it?

You could have two pistols fired by the same person have two vastly different speeds even though the weapons work the same.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#822
#822
luthervol said:
Rational and reasonable regulations are not infringements....The SCOTUS has already settled that nonsense.
Click to expand...
They are exactly infringements. They arent benefits or extensions. Just because the SC agreed to them doesnt mean they arent infringements. They are just infringements the SC allows.
 
#825
#825
LouderVol said:
How would you ever classify it?

You could have two pistols fired by the same person have two vastly different speeds even though the weapons work the same.
Click to expand...
Why would two pistols fired by the same person have vastly different speeds?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top