REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Biden says a shotgun will scare off intruders

POSTED BY: GEEZER
UPDATED: Tuesday, August 8, 2023 06:49
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 5513
PAGE 1 of 3

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 3:18 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

NEDRA PICKLER
Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Vice President Joe Biden said Tuesday that Americans don't need semi-automatic weapons to protect their homes because a couple of blasts from a shotgun will scare off intruders.

"Buy a shotgun, buy a shotgun," the vice president encouraged those worried about defending themselves. He was speaking in an online video as part of a Facebook town hall hosted by Parents Magazine on the administration's strategy for reducing gun violence, which he has led at the direction of President Barack Obama.

Biden said he keeps two shotguns and shells locked up at home and he's told his wife, Jill, to use them if she needs protection. He presumably was speaking about before he became vice president, a position that gives the couple full-time Secret Service protection.

"I said, 'Jill, if there's ever a problem, just walk out on the balcony ... take that double-barrel shotgun and fire two blasts outside the house,'" Biden said. "You don't need an AR-15. It's harder to aim, it's harder to use and in fact, you don't need 30 rounds to protect yourself."

Biden's answer came in response to a question posted by a Facebook user about whether the administration's proposal to ban military-style assault weapons and high-capacity magazines would make law-abiding citizens more of a target of criminals since they wouldn't have a sufficient way of protecting themselves. Biden bristled at the question, saying he's never heard such sentiments in the pages of Parents Magazine.

"But I'm delighted to answer them," he added quickly.

Biden said he learned his lessons on gun safety from his father, who was a hunter. He said as a child, he wasn't even allowed to point a cap gun at other children while playing cops and robbers. He said most gun owners are very responsible, but parents should make sure guns are locked up to keep children safe, just like pool gates and liquor cabinets.

He also said he doesn't think the Second Amendment's right to bear arms should be changed. He said limits on the use of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines is compatible with that right.



http://www.wtop.com/209/3228938/Biden-says-a-shotgun-will-scare-off-in
truders


So, anyone here who's familiar with gun safety think its a good idea to "... just walk out on the balcony ... take that double-barrel shotgun and fire two blasts outside the house..."?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 4:03 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Certainly it's safer than using an AR-15 with metal-jacketed rounds to try to "defend" your home in an urban environment.



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 7:35 AM

STORYMARK


Well, assuming one is a extreme pedant who takes everything literally - even then, I don't see a huge problem. If it's fired into the air to intimidate intruders, worse case scenario is some pellets raining down harmlessly.

So, yeah, I find that a whole lot better than an assualt rifle that could punch through the walls of a house a few blocks away.






Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 7:46 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


I have to wonder, though - would the scenario Biden describes fall under that class of "citizens using guns to thwart crimes" that some have claimed happens several million times per year in this country?



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 7:56 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Personally, though, I'd recommend a pump-action shotgun myself, rather than a double-barrel model. I also recommend loading shells in sequential order: blank (no shot pellets at all, just powder and wadding), followed by birdshot (very small pellets), followed by buckshot (larger pellets), followed by slugs.

And if you can find them cheap enough, try the "less than lethal" beanbag or rubber ball rounds after (or in place of) the blanks.



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 9:49 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by GEEZER:
So, anyone here who's familiar with gun safety think its a good idea to "... just walk out on the balcony ... take that double-barrel shotgun and fire two blasts outside the house..."?


Safety is not the issue. First of all, its bad tactics. Its dark, bad guys are coming to rob and kill you and your family in your home which you know better then they do. The Vice President advises you to give away two of your most valuable resources: surprise and position.

Also, its likely illegal. Most Cities and towns have ordinances against things like 'Discharging a Firearm Within City Limits'. Many States also have the Castle Doctrine (which requires you to be inside your home and bars premptive action or pursuit). Self defense is a pretty good defense, but it requires an actual threat, not the percieved threat the Vice President suggested. In effect the Vice President has advised millions of Americans to commit a crime if they feel nervous.

I also note for the record that having discharged both barrels you are now unarmed unless you take the time to reload, which for double barreled shotguns is an involved task taking considerable time during which you are now vulnerable (as opposed to just ejecting a spent magazine and slapping in a new one).

Better advice along the same line is to use a semi-automatic shotgun such as my Benelli Super Nova which carries three rounds and one in the chamber thus having fired my two warning shots (hopefully not accidently killing my supermodel girlfriend, the neighbor's dog, or my daughter's boyfriend in the process) I can then be assurred of two additional rounds to actually fight with should the need arise. Also reloading is easier.

Even better advice (again, assuming you want to give warning shots) is to take along either a semi-automatic handgun or assault rifle with large capacity magazines so that on the off chance your warning is ignored you remain a viable threat for the entire fight.

Our police instructer told me the average number of total shots fired in situation such as this is between 12 and 16. Having a gun does you no good if you run out of bullets before the other guy does.

In the meantime, I'm sure the Secret Service is happy knowing the Mrs. Biden is ready to back them up if needed.

H

Hero...must be right on all of this. ALL of the rest of us are wrong. Chrisisall, 2012

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 9:50 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Personally, though, I'd recommend a pump-action shotgun myself, rather than a double-barrel model. I also recommend loading shells in sequential order: blank (no shot pellets at all, just powder and wadding), followed by birdshot (very small pellets), followed by buckshot (larger pellets), followed by slugs.


They make a nice combo round that combines a couple buckshot pellets on top of a slug. Perfect for home defense.

H

Hero...must be right on all of this. ALL of the rest of us are wrong. Chrisisall, 2012

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 9:53 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Certainly it's safer than using an AR-15 with metal-jacketed rounds to try to "defend" your home in an urban environment.



Hmm. So in your mind firing a couple of rounds of 00 buckshot - 30 pellets with about the same weight (ETA) each as an individual .223 round - at random into the night as a first response in the hope of scaring off an intruder is safer for your family and neighbors than firing .223 rounds at an identified target, or asking the intruder to leave rather than get shot.

Please never come around me with a gun, Mike. Your concept of gun safety is suspect, to say the least.


"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 9:58 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Certainly it's safer than using an AR-15 with metal-jacketed rounds to try to "defend" your home in an urban environment.



Who the hell is Biden to tell American citizens what they do or don't NEED ?

Isn't that kinda up for them to decide ?

Or are we once again seeing big daddy govt Leftist downplaying that annoying thing called FREEDOM.

And at what point of the home invasion does one take the time to walk out onto the back deck, assuming there IS one, and start blasting away into the night , to fend off would be attackers ? Is it when you THINK you hear something? After they're already in the house ? Or do you just randomly wander out back, aiming higher than Obama does when he shoots skeet, and start blasting away ?

I just love the audio of Biden ... " just buy a shot gun ". Hope to see / hear that quote a few times come the next election cycle.



Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 10:02 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
Also, its likely illegal. Most Cities and towns have ordinances against things like 'Discharging a Firearm Within City Limits'. Many States also have the Castle Doctrine (which requires you to be inside your home and bars premptive action or pursuit). Self defense is a pretty good defense, but it requires an actual threat, not the percieved threat the Vice President suggested. In effect the Vice President has advised millions of Americans to commit a crime if they feel nervous.



Come to think of it, for most of us, stepping out onto the balcony and firing a shotgun into the night might be a very good way to get shot by police responding to a 'shots fired' report.


"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 10:03 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

Who the hell is Biden to tell American citizens what they do or don't NEED ?

'American citizens' asked him the question... When will you start reading the relevant information in threads?

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 10:05 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
So, yeah, I find that a whole lot better than an assualt rifle that could punch through the walls of a house a few blocks away.


That is a very good point. The rules for shooting in self defense begin with 'hit what you are shooting at' and end with 'don't hit anything else'.

I prosecuted a road rage case where a plumber felt he was cut off by another driver. He follwed him for a bit and both got stuck at a long red light. Plumber gets out of his van confronts the other driver and then returns to his van and then turns around and charges the other car with a large pipe. The driver of the other car saw the man screaming obsenities and coming at him with a pipe and he pulls his Colt 1911 handgun (he had a licensed gun and CCW permit) and fires two rounds over his shoulder at point blank range. He misses both times (so close plumber had powder burns on his arm). The rounds strike a vehicle passing by in the other lane headed the opposite direction (boy was that lady surprised and upset).

Good news was nobody hurt. I charged the plumber with Agg Assault, a felony. I charged shooter with Discharge In City Limits, a misdemeanor, (and could have charged with Improper Handling of a Firearm in a Motor Vehicle, a felony) and Criminal Damaging (for the bullet holes).

The moral of the story is this. He shoots plumber and kills him...its self defense, we give him a medal, parade, etc. He misses, we charge him with a crime and self defense does not absolve him of injury he recklessly or negligently causes others...he kills the passing motorist...Negligent Homicide is a crime in Ohio.

Also, he kills the passing motorist, plumber gets the Felony Murder charge. So I guess the other moral is...'pipe down'?

H

Hero...must be right on all of this. ALL of the rest of us are wrong. Chrisisall, 2012

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 10:05 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Tactical quibbles aside Geezer, do you maintain that 'military-style assault weapons' are essential to home defence?

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 10:08 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by kpo:
Quote:

Who the hell is Biden to tell American citizens what they do or don't NEED ?

'American citizens' asked him the question... When will you start reading the relevant information in threads?

It's not personal. It's just war.



I don't have to, knowing full well this VP and this administration want nothing less than to take guns away from the citizens, and it starts w/ this phony ban on " assault " rifles.



Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 10:10 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


For Biden -

How about that being up to the people, and not the govt, to decide ?

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 10:13 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by GEEZER:
Hmm. So in your mind firing a couple of rounds of 00 buckshot - 30 pellets with about the same weight (ETA) each as an individual .223 round - at random into the night as a first response in the hope of scaring off an intruder is safer for your family and neighbors than firing .223 rounds at an identified target, or asking the intruder to leave rather than get shot.


I'm pretty sure your off on your weight, but you are definately off on velocity, shape, and composition of the bullets.

Shotguns have a short effective range. Buckshot rounds will no penetrate windows or siding and if they do they'll have spent their energy and likely cause no further damage.

.223 rounds are designed to penetrate and keep going. The range is long, the velocity higher, and they can penetrate walls, siding, glass, etc (and often multiple layers) and still keep going with a lethal amount of energy.

Imagine a cannon. Grapeshot was like a shotgun blast, effective at short range only against attacking infantry, but useless in a long range artillery duel. At long range they'd switch to rifled, solid shot. Then somebody got the idea of shaping bullets into something other then round balls and making them from things other then lead....and things got ugly very quickly.

H

Hero...must be right on all of this. ALL of the rest of us are wrong. Chrisisall, 2012

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 10:13 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by GEEZER:
Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Certainly it's safer than using an AR-15 with metal-jacketed rounds to try to "defend" your home in an urban environment.



Hmm. So in your mind firing a couple of rounds of 00 buckshot - 30 pellets with about the same weight (ETA) each as an individual .223 round - at random into the night as a first response in the hope of scaring off an intruder is safer for your family and neighbors than firing .223 rounds at an identified target, or asking the intruder to leave rather than get shot.

Please never come around me with a gun, Mike. Your concept of gun safety is suspect, to say the least.


"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."



Cute how you deliberately ignore the difference in velocity and force impact between the two.

Your concept of physics (and honesty) is suspect, to say the least.




Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 10:15 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:

Originally posted by kpo:
Quote:

Who the hell is Biden to tell American citizens what they do or don't NEED ?

'American citizens' asked him the question... When will you start reading the relevant information in threads?

It's not personal. It's just war.



I don't have to, knowing full well this VP and this administration want nothing less than to take guns away from the citizens, and it starts w/ this phony ban on " assault " rifles.




Oh, look, he's playing psychic again. Adorable.




Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 10:17 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:

Originally posted by kpo:
Tactical quibbles aside Geezer, do you maintain that 'military-style assault weapons' are essential to home defence?

It's not personal. It's just war.



How about that being up to the people, and not the govt, to decide ?



Once again, reading skills, son. He asked Geezer his opinion, not the Government.

I know, they both start with G, and when your reading comprehension skills are so (very, very) low, that can be confusing. But they are different entities, honest.




Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 10:21 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:

Originally posted by kpo:
Tactical quibbles aside Geezer, do you maintain that 'military-style assault weapons' are essential to home defence?

It's not personal. It's just war.



How about that being up to the people, and not the govt, to decide ?



How about Geezer and I discussing it, since neither of us are in government?

ETA:

Oh I see Story covered it.

LOL, perhaps you want to rephrase this AU:

"...this VP and this administration want nothing less than to take guns away from the citizens..."

I can't quote you in the predictions thread when you say the opposite of what you mean.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 10:31 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by kpo:
Tactical quibbles aside Geezer, do you maintain that 'military-style assault weapons' are essential to home defence?


It depends on what you are defending against.

Guns are like other tools. You want to knock a tiny hole in your wall, you use a hammer and nail. But if your project involves tearing the wall out...then using the hammer and nail isn't going to get it done quick enough or in an effective way.

The best approach to home defense is a balanced approach. In confined spaces at short range against one or two attackers...NOTHING beats a shotgun. The downside is limited range and limited ammunition capacity. A good example is Walking Tall starring The Rock. In two scenes we see the advantage and disadvantage of shotguns. At the house his dad kills a dude at close range with a shotgun. At the police station The Rock is armed with a shotgun and completely unable to defend the station against an attack with an assault weapon.

My solution is this. I have a small handgun for concealed carry, a shotgun and larger 9mm semi-auto (15rd clip) for home defense, a .357 Magnum revolver cause it belonged to my dad and also because its damned reliable and will pretty much knock down anybody, and lastly I'm getting a Sig M400 as my JIC (Just in Case) weapon.

So while you may not forsee a need an assault weapon for everyday home defense, you NEVER want to be in a situation where your thinking, 'I REALLY need an assault rifle right now...I wish I had one'. Cause that would be bad.

H

Hero...must be right on all of this. ALL of the rest of us are wrong. Chrisisall, 2012

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 10:37 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:

Oh, look, he's playing psychic again. Adorable.



There are no such things as real psychics. It's called not being fooled by who Democrats are, and what they do.

Sheriffs can inspect homes for safe gun storage in Washington state under Democratic weapon bill


A new bill working through Washington state’s legislature would allow local sheriffs to enter homes of gun owners to ensure their weapons are properly stored.

The bill, pushed by Democrats, allows police to search where and how assault weapons are stored — as well as how safely they are stored, according to its text, listed in the state’s online legislative directory as SB 5737-2013-14.

Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/19/democrats-gun-bill-let
s-washington-state-sheriffs
-/

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 10:46 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by kpo:
Tactical quibbles aside Geezer, do you maintain that 'military-style assault weapons' are essential to home defence?



Are Corvettes essential to drive to work?

Are Porterhouse steaks essential to eating?

Are Rolexes essential for knowing what time it is?

Very few things are absolutely 'essential'. Do you want to do without all the things that aren't?

In many cases, a short, easy to handle, moderately powerful semi-automatic rifle can be useful for home defense and other sorts of self-defense. That's why police and folks like the Secret Service carry them to protect folks like Joe Biden. You think Joe will ask the Secret Service to replace them with double barreled shotguns?



"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 10:56 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by GEEZER:
Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Certainly it's safer than using an AR-15 with metal-jacketed rounds to try to "defend" your home in an urban environment.



Hmm. So in your mind firing a couple of rounds of 00 buckshot - 30 pellets with about the same weight (ETA) each as an individual .223 round - at random into the night as a first response in the hope of scaring off an intruder is safer for your family and neighbors than firing .223 rounds at an identified target, or asking the intruder to leave rather than get shot.

Please never come around me with a gun, Mike. Your concept of gun safety is suspect, to say the least.


"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."




And I'll thank you never to come around me with a gun, either, you old fool. Your AR-15 tends to shoot THROUGH people with that .223 round, which is entirely what it was designed to do, since a grievously injured enemy is much more desirable for a war weapon than a dead enemy.

For someone who claims to have been in the military, you know fuck-all about tactics or weapons.

Yes, firing a shotgun - even one with buckshot - into the air is preferable to firing a weapon that will penetrate your exterior walls on its way to penetrating your neighbor's exterior walls. I've explained this to you more than once, and you seem to still be too stupid to fathom it. I expect this kind of idiocy from Rappy or "Hero", who claim to have zero knowledge of guns, weaponry, or tactics, but I had hoped you were smarter than they are. Clearly I was mistaken in that hope.

When you fire a shotgun into the air, you have created a small storm of smaller-than-pea-sized "hail" that will rain harmlessly down. Can you please show me any verified accounts of any innocent bystanders being killed by errant shotgun pellets raining down on them from above after such a gun has been fired into the air? I'll wait.



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 11:01 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
So, yeah, I find that a whole lot better than an assualt rifle that could punch through the walls of a house a few blocks away.


That is a very good point. The rules for shooting in self defense begin with 'hit what you are shooting at' and end with 'don't hit anything else'.

I prosecuted a road rage case where a plumber felt he was cut off by another driver. He follwed him for a bit and both got stuck at a long red light. Plumber gets out of his van confronts the other driver and then returns to his van and then turns around and charges the other car with a large pipe. The driver of the other car saw the man screaming obsenities and coming at him with a pipe and he pulls his Colt 1911 handgun (he had a licensed gun and CCW permit) and fires two rounds over his shoulder at point blank range. He misses both times (so close plumber had powder burns on his arm). The rounds strike a vehicle passing by in the other lane headed the opposite direction (boy was that lady surprised and upset).

Good news was nobody hurt. I charged the plumber with Agg Assault, a felony. I charged shooter with Discharge In City Limits, a misdemeanor, (and could have charged with Improper Handling of a Firearm in a Motor Vehicle, a felony) and Criminal Damaging (for the bullet holes).

The moral of the story is this. He shoots plumber and kills him...its self defense, we give him a medal, parade, etc. He misses, we charge him with a crime and self defense does not absolve him of injury he recklessly or negligently causes others...he kills the passing motorist...Negligent Homicide is a crime in Ohio.

Also, he kills the passing motorist, plumber gets the Felony Murder charge. So I guess the other moral is...'pipe down'?

H

Hero...must be right on all of this. ALL of the rest of us are wrong. Chrisisall, 2012





He should have had a Barrett 25mm semi-auto for "self defense", then. That way he could have shot through the plumber, through the plumber's van, through the motorist behind him, through their car, and through the car behind her.

And you'd have called it "self defense... give him a medal, a parade, etc."


That is exactly what you're proposing when you say you want assault rifles for "home protection".





"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 11:04 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Certainly it's safer than using an AR-15 with metal-jacketed rounds to try to "defend" your home in an urban environment.



Who the hell is Biden to tell American citizens what they do or don't NEED ?

Isn't that kinda up for them to decide ?




And who the hell do you think America is to tell Iraqis what they do or don't NEED, or to tell Iran what weapons it does or doesn't NEED?

If you say that we have that right because of the damage their weapons might do to others, then welcome to the real discussion. Your right to defend yourself ends at your property line, and it ends with weapons that will create a threat to your neighbors.

Your "freedom" to swing your fist ends at my nose.



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 11:09 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:


And who the hell do you think America is to tell Iraqis what they do or don't NEED, or to tell Iran what weapons it does or doesn't NEED?



Completely non - responsive to the issue being discussed.

Quote:



If you say that we have that right because of the damage their weapons might do to others, then welcome to the real discussion. Your right to defend yourself ends at your property line, and it ends with weapons that will create a threat to your neighbors.

Your "freedom" to swing your fist ends at my nose.





More of the same, I see.


Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 11:11 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:

Oh, look, he's playing psychic again. Adorable.



There are no such things as real psychics.



Thank you for that bit of wisdom, Captain Obvious.

Note, that's why I used the word "playing" genius.




Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 11:12 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by GEEZER:
Quote:

Originally posted by kpo:
Tactical quibbles aside Geezer, do you maintain that 'military-style assault weapons' are essential to home defence?



Are Corvettes essential to drive to work?

Are Porterhouse steaks essential to eating?

Are Rolexes essential for knowing what time it is?

Very few things are absolutely 'essential'. Do you want to do without all the things that aren't?

In many cases, a short, easy to handle, moderately powerful semi-automatic rifle can be useful for home defense and other sorts of self-defense. That's why police and folks like the Secret Service carry them to protect folks like Joe Biden. You think Joe will ask the Secret Service to replace them with double barreled shotguns?



"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."



Nice dodge.

Dumb and cowardly.

You really should change your avatar - as you continually disgrace the uniform.




Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 11:19 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Certainly it's safer than using an AR-15 with metal-jacketed rounds to try to "defend" your home in an urban environment.



Who the hell is Biden to tell American citizens what they do or don't NEED ?

Isn't that kinda up for them to decide ?




And who the hell do you think America is to tell Iraqis what they do or don't NEED, or to tell Iran what weapons it does or doesn't NEED?

If you say that we have that right because of the damage their weapons might do to others, then welcome to the real discussion. Your right to defend yourself ends at your property line, and it ends with weapons that will create a threat to your neighbors.

Your "freedom" to swing your fist ends at my nose.



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."



Come now, we all now that paralleling concepts (like analogies and metaphors, and well, most rhetorical devices used in discussion) hurts poor rappys head. It always sets off a little tantrum.




Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 11:20 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
Shotguns have a short effective range.



Yep. 00 buckshot is lethal out to about 100 yds as opposed to a .223 which is good to maybe 600.

However, in my neighborhood, there's probably 12 or 15 houses within 100 yds of my house. There are people in those houses and in cars and in yards and on sidewalks. So two rounds of 00 buck fired off into the night is still a lot of dangerous lead flying around the neighborhood.

The point being - if a shotgun, or an AR-15, is used in the dangerous manner V.P. Biden suggests, it puts more folks at risk than aimed fire at an intruder from an AR-15, or a shotgun.


"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 11:20 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!



Sure Storybook. Just ignore the fact that DEMOCRATS gave us a meaningless, useless gun ban, back in the 90's, and also ignore the fact that it's DEMOCRATS , in the state of WA, who want to enter into the homes of honest American citizens and " check " to see if guns are being stored properly, safely.

Safely by whose standards ? And what BUSINESS is it of the got to check up on law abiding citizens in the first place like that , with forced entry into their homes, under penalty of a year in prison?

Care to dance around that issue ?

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 11:24 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:

Come now, we all now that paralleling concepts (like analogies and metaphors, and well, most rhetorical devices used in discussion) hurts poor rappys head. It always sets off a little tantrum.




No, it just shows how some can't deal w/ the actual issues, and instead must fall back on ( in their mind ) a tried and true whipping post, of the Iraq War. This has zero to do w/ that issue, and to try to draw irrelevant, false analogies to it gets us no where.

Deal w/ the facts on THIS issue, and try not to get stuck on stupid. If ya can.


PS - Oh, and storybook - Geezer completely nailed it in his response to kpo's post. For some reason, it pissed you off so much , as you know it was dead on, that you cowardly took to insulting him and his service.

Bravo Geezer.

( And no, one doesn't need to be a mind reader to figure out your petty widdle mind, Storybook )



Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 11:37 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Your AR-15 tends to shoot THROUGH people with that .223 round, which is entirely what it was designed to do, since a grievously injured enemy is much more desirable for a war weapon than a dead enemy.

For someone who claims to have been in the military, you know fuck-all about tactics or weapons.



If I had an AR-15 I was using for home defense, it would be loaded with frangible ammuntion, which doesn't overpenetrate. Ever hear of it? Did you even realize that you don't have to shoot ball ammo out of a rifle?


"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 11:45 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by GEEZER:
Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
Shotguns have a short effective range.



Yep. 00 buckshot is lethal out to about 100 yds



Says, just you, basically. All the sources I find list an effective range of 30-40 yards, if not less.

But please, keep lecturing others about gun safety while getting everything wrong. As per usual.




Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 11:46 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:


PS - Oh, and storybook - Geezer completely nailed it in his response to kpo's post. For some reason, it pissed you off so much , as you know it was dead on, that you cowardly took to insulting him and his service.

Bravo Geezer.



Only those as dumb-fuck moronic as the two of you would consider completely avoiding the question to be "nailing" it.

And once again, you mistake laughing at you for being pissed. You never cease to amuse.

And Im not insulting his service - Im flat out saying I think he's lying about it.



Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 11:49 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Sure Storybook. Just ignore the fact that DEMOCRATS gave us a meaningless, useless gun ban, back in the 90's, and also ignore the fact that it's DEMOCRATS , in the state of WA, who want to enter into the homes of honest American citizens and " check " to see if guns are being stored properly, safely.

Safely by whose standards ? And what BUSINESS is it of the got to check up on law abiding citizens in the first place like that , with forced entry into their homes, under penalty of a year in prison?

Care to dance around that issue ?




Was this in response to something in particular, or just more ranting? You're language skills are so poor (what business is it of got, indeed??), its impossible to tell.




Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 11:49 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

Originally posted by GEEZER:
Quote:

Originally posted by kpo:
Tactical quibbles aside Geezer, do you maintain that 'military-style assault weapons' are essential to home defence?



Are Corvettes essential to drive to work?

Are Porterhouse steaks essential to eating?

Are Rolexes essential for knowing what time it is?

Very few things are absolutely 'essential'. Do you want to do without all the things that aren't?



But Biden was responding to the question that removing 'military-style assault weapons' from citizens would make them more vulnerable, and hence that these guns are essential (or at least important) to citizens protecting themselves. But you don't seem to see these weapons that way; perhaps you even agree with Biden that citizens can adequately protect their homes with just shotguns and handguns?

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 11:59 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by GEEZER:
Yep. 00 buckshot is lethal out to about 100 yds as opposed to a .223 which is good to maybe 600.


The effective range is about 25 yards. Its still lethal to 100, but the odds of hitting a target are greatly diminished and the odds of a kill are very small since your shot pattern is about eight feet.

One pellet is not going to kill you. It can...but then again you could also be hit by an meteor and a lightning strike at exactly the same time.

Also, if the shot hits siding, windows, etc its either going to stop or be slowed so much its no longer lethal.

H

Hero...must be right on all of this. ALL of the rest of us are wrong. Chrisisall, 2012

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 12:02 PM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

In many cases, a short, easy to handle, moderately powerful semi-automatic rifle can be useful for home defense


'Can be useful.' Hmm. A more interesting question is, would you, as a knowledgeable gun-owner, in good conscience, advise a typical family concerned about home safety that a combination of shotguns/handguns really would not be enough to protect themselves in their home?

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 12:08 PM

STORYMARK


Even Hero is disputing Geezer. Priceless.




Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 12:21 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
Quote:

Originally posted by GEEZER:
Yep. 00 buckshot is lethal out to about 100 yds as opposed to a .223 which is good to maybe 600.



The effective range is about 25 yards. Its still lethal to 100, but the odds of hitting a target are greatly diminished and the odds of a kill are very small since your shot pattern is about eight feet.

One pellet is not going to kill you. It can...but then again you could also be hit by an meteor and a lightning strike at exactly the same time.

Also, if the shot hits siding, windows, etc its either going to stop or be slowed so much its no longer lethal.

H

Hero...must be right on all of this. ALL of the rest of us are wrong. Chrisisall, 2012



Storybook, you go ahead and stand down range from a shot gun blast, and then tell us whether it was " lethal " or " effective ". And be sure to go into great detail how much it was one or t'other.

I believe both Hero and Geezer said the same thing. Pay attention.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 12:28 PM

STORYMARK


LOL! Yes... Hero saying it's as likely to happen as being hit by a meteor is totally the same thing! Again with the reading skills, boy.

I think you just made my point. Thank you!




Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 12:29 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Sure Storybook. Just ignore the fact that DEMOCRATS gave us a meaningless, useless gun ban, back in the 90's, and also ignore the fact that it's DEMOCRATS , in the state of WA, who want to enter into the homes of honest American citizens and " check " to see if guns are being stored properly, safely.

Safely by whose standards ? And what BUSINESS is it of the got to check up on law abiding citizens in the first place like that , with forced entry into their homes, under penalty of a year in prison?

Care to dance around that issue ?




Was this in response to something in particular, or just more ranting? You're language skills are so poor (what business is it of got, indeed??), its impossible to tell.




Yes, it was , simpleton. It was in response to your NON response of my prior post.

Your reply - Thank you for that bit of wisdom, Captain Obvious.

Note, that's why I used the word "playing" genius.


You skipped right over the substance of my post, which seems to be a common theme for certain folks on this board.

That means you, in case you missed it.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 12:32 PM

STORYMARK


Son, one must have substance before it is skipped. And you are, as always, severely lacking.




Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 12:37 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
Son, one must have substance before it is skipped. And you are, as always, severely lacking.



... says the one who clearly isn't burdened with an overabundance of schoolin'.

Might be better for you to just admit you're in over your head here, than to keep faking it.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2013 4:26 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
Quote:

Originally posted by kpo:
Tactical quibbles aside Geezer, do you maintain that 'military-style assault weapons' are essential to home defence?


It depends on what you are defending against.

Guns are like other tools. You want to knock a tiny hole in your wall, you use a hammer and nail. But if your project involves tearing the wall out...then using the hammer and nail isn't going to get it done quick enough or in an effective way.

The best approach to home defense is a balanced approach. In confined spaces at short range against one or two attackers...NOTHING beats a shotgun. The downside is limited range and limited ammunition capacity. A good example is Walking Tall starring The Rock. In two scenes we see the advantage and disadvantage of shotguns. At the house his dad kills a dude at close range with a shotgun. At the police station The Rock is armed with a shotgun and completely unable to defend the station against an attack with an assault weapon.

My solution is this. I have a small handgun for concealed carry, a shotgun and larger 9mm semi-auto (15rd clip) for home defense, a .357 Magnum revolver cause it belonged to my dad and also because its damned reliable and will pretty much knock down anybody, and lastly I'm getting a Sig M400 as my JIC (Just in Case) weapon.

So while you may not forsee a need an assault weapon for everyday home defense, you NEVER want to be in a situation where your thinking, 'I REALLY need an assault rifle right now...I wish I had one'. Cause that would be bad.

H

Hero...must be right on all of this. ALL of the rest of us are wrong. Chrisisall, 2012





See? That's why I'm putting all my spare money into booby traps and truck bombs. I never want to be in a situation to think "Gee, if only I'd have lined the entryway with Claymores!"

I'll be installing a Minuteman missile silo in the back yard, too. Y'know, just in case of... tyranny!


And yes, you really do sound that stupid, "Hero".



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 21, 2013 12:27 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
Quote:

Originally posted by GEEZER:
Yep. 00 buckshot is lethal out to about 100 yds as opposed to a .223 which is good to maybe 600.


The effective range is about 25 yards. Its still lethal to 100, but the odds of hitting a target are greatly diminished and the odds of a kill are very small since your shot pattern is about eight feet.



Accuracy isn't much of an issue if you're firing off warning shots at random. And if you nail a neighbor, or a neighbor's house, or a neighbor's car, or a neighbor's pet, with one 54 grain pellet of that load you fired at random, you're still in trouble whether you kill someone or not.

Once again, the point is that firing anything off into the neighborhood as a warning shot isn't a good idea at all.


"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 21, 2013 12:31 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by kpo:
Quote:

In many cases, a short, easy to handle, moderately powerful semi-automatic rifle can be useful for home defense


'Can be useful.' Hmm. A more interesting question is, would you, as a knowledgeable gun-owner, in good conscience, advise a typical family concerned about home safety that a combination of shotguns/handguns really would not be enough to protect themselves in their home?



Depends on the circumstances. Depends on where the home is. Depends on who is doing the shooting and their skill level with each type of weapon.

Would you recommend that a family get a Civic or a minivan? Depends on their circumstances.

Under no circumstance would I advise anyone to fire off any gun at random in hopes of scaring off an intruder.


"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 21, 2013 12:50 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Yes, firing a shotgun - even one with buckshot - into the air is preferable to firing a weapon that will penetrate your exterior walls on its way to penetrating your neighbor's exterior walls. I've explained this to you more than once, and you seem to still be too stupid to fathom it.



Perhaps because it's not true?

Interesting test of various .223, pistol, and shotgun loads against drywall here. http://how-i-did-it.org/drywall/results.html Seems that most .223 tends to fragment after one or two walls of drywall, whereas handgun ammo above .380 and 00 buck generally cruise through three with no trouble.

Here's another interesting test against a mockup exterior wall..."This piece of wall was sheeted with ½" wafer board, covered with a 2nd piece of ½" wafer board to simulate siding. This wall was built using a 2x4 frame and finished on the inside with ½" sheet rock. The interior [of the wall] was lined with fiberglass insulation."
http://www.olyarms.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&a
mp;id=15%3A223-penetration-testing&catid=13%3Atechnical-info&Itemid=26

Both .40S&W and a 12 gauge slug had much more penetrating power than a .223 round.

It really is funny to watch you just make stuff up, or parrot the "high-powered assault weapons" crap in your attempt to cover up the fact that Biden's advice to fire a shotgun off the balcony at nothing in particular is dangerous to innocent bystanders, probably illegal in most jurisdictions, and pretty stupid tactically. Gotta protect your idol, I guess.


"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, March 28, 2024 02:07 - 3408 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Wed, March 27, 2024 23:21 - 987 posts
Elections; 2024
Wed, March 27, 2024 22:19 - 2069 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Wed, March 27, 2024 15:03 - 824 posts
NBC News: Behind the scenes, Biden has grown angry and anxious about re-election effort
Wed, March 27, 2024 14:58 - 2 posts
BUILD BACK BETTER!
Wed, March 27, 2024 14:45 - 5 posts
RFK Jr. Destroys His Candidacy With VP Pick?
Wed, March 27, 2024 11:59 - 16 posts
Russia says 60 dead, 145 injured in concert hall raid; Islamic State group claims responsibility
Wed, March 27, 2024 10:57 - 49 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Wed, March 27, 2024 07:58 - 6153 posts
Ha. Haha! HAHA! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHA!!!!!!
Tue, March 26, 2024 21:26 - 1 posts
You can't take the sky from me, a tribute to Firefly
Tue, March 26, 2024 16:26 - 293 posts
Tucker Carlson
Tue, March 26, 2024 16:24 - 132 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL