Liberal Forum

Huey » 09 Jun 2022, 12:56 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 12:56 pm

Let's finish off your NATO reference.  They are designated NATO rounds because they are designed for military use.  They are nothing more than FMJ rounds.  They are not hollow points or any specialty PD rounds.  Reason being for years expandng bullets were considered illegal by Geneva Convention Standards, including the time when Stoner created this round.  Here is what soldiers say about this allegedly devastating round:

Soldiers in combat suggested that existing ammunition (like the M855 5.56mm round) was often ineffective against the enemy, especially in urban environments where bullets tended to pass “through and through,” causing insufficient injury to put the enemy out of the fight, and escalating civilian deaths from ricochets and the increased number of bullets fired. 

That article is actually taking the line that expandable bullets (hollow points, etc) are allowed in combat and DOD has changed their rules:

https://www.justsecurity.org/25200/dod- ... -conflict/

While hollow points are commonly used by police and civilians, they are banned in international warfare under the 1899 Hague Convention's early laws of war that the United States has followed even though the U.S. government never ratified the agreement.

https://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/hollow ... n-us-army/

The point being is the round that Stoner created was not really as effective and destructive as you claim.  Let's talk ammo.

Huey » 09 Jun 2022, 12:46 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 12:46 pm

Then you should be whining to ban that specific round.  Not the rifle. Because as it has been demonstrated that round can be used in many different rifles.  

Game. Set. Match.

Huey » 09 Jun 2022, 12:34 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 12:34 pm

That is not the only time I have brought it up.  I guess you are saying you never, ever considered a date with a tranny.

Huey » 09 Jun 2022, 12:33 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 12:33 pm

All you have done is ask questions and not answer any.  You have not made a clear cut point.  My description of your point stands.

It shows you have no understanding of ammo or firearms.  If you understood you would be calling for a ban on certain ammo as opposed to a certain gun.  You try and get an AR ban and guess what?  If successful everyone buy another rifle that does not look mean and scary that fires 5.56 or 223.  

You idiots think thru you decsions.

Blackvegetable » 09 Jun 2022, 1:17 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 1:17 pm

Huey » 09 Jun 2022, 12:56 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 12:56 pm

Let's finish off your NATO reference.  They are designated NATO rounds because they are designed for military use.  They are nothing more than FMJ rounds.  They are not hollow points or any specialty PD rounds.  Reason being for years expandng bullets were considered illegal by Geneva Convention Standards, including the time when Stoner created this round.  Here is what soldiers say about this allegedly devastating round:

Soldiers in combat suggested that existing ammunition (like the M855 5.56mm round) was often ineffective against the enemy, especially in urban environments where bullets tended to pass “through and through,” causing insufficient injury to put the enemy out of the fight, and escalating civilian deaths from ricochets and the increased number of bullets fired. 

That article is actually taking the line that expandable bullets (hollow points, etc) are allowed in combat and DOD has changed their rules:

https://www.justsecurity.org/25200/dod- ... -conflict/

While hollow points are commonly used by police and civilians, they are banned in international warfare under the 1899 Hague Convention's early laws of war that the United States has followed even though the U.S. government never ratified the agreement.

https://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/hollow ... n-us-army/

The point being is the round that Stoner created was not really as effective and destructive as you claim.  Let's talk ammo.

We can stop right there.

 

Pepperluciophobia » 09 Jun 2022, 1:17 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 1:17 pm

Huey » 09 Jun 2022, 12:46 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 12:46 pm

Then you should be whining to ban that specific round.  Not the rifle. Because as it has been demonstrated that round can be used in many different rifles.  

Game. Set. Match.

Never mind they will deny it….

Blackvegetable » 09 Jun 2022, 1:18 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 1:18 pm

Huey » 09 Jun 2022, 12:46 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 12:46 pm

Then you should be whining to ban that specific round.  Not the rifle. Because as it has been demonstrated that round can be used in many different rifles.  

Game. Set. Match.

Not unless there's a rule, Controlly. 

 

Blackvegetable » 09 Jun 2022, 1:19 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 1:19 pm

Huey » 09 Jun 2022, 12:34 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 12:34 pm

That is not the only time I have brought it up.  I guess you are saying you never, ever considered a date with a tranny.

I never have.

It wasn't the question posed to the forum.


 

 

Huey » 09 Jun 2022, 1:28 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 1:28 pm

Ooh, now the truth is coming out.  Bring it on!

@Vegas

Blackvegetable » 09 Jun 2022, 1:20 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 1:20 pm

Huey » 09 Jun 2022, 12:33 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 12:33 pm

All you have done is ask questions and not answer any.  You have not made a clear cut point.  My description of your point stands.

It shows you have no understanding of ammo or firearms.  If you understood you would be calling for a ban on certain ammo as opposed to a certain gun.  You try and get an AR ban and guess what?  If successful everyone buy another rifle that does not look mean and scary that fires 5.56 or 223.  

You idiots think thru you decsions.

No need to read past the lie.
 

 

Cannonpointer » 09 Jun 2022, 12:06 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 12:06 pm

No questions, dick sucker.

Blackvegetable » 09 Jun 2022, 1:29 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 1:29 pm

Huey » 09 Jun 2022, 1:28 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 1:28 pm

Ooh, now the truth is coming out.  Bring it on!

@Vegas

Since you brought it up in desperation,, what question did I ask?

 

Blackvegetable » 09 Jun 2022, 10:18 am » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 10:18 am

Is there a context?

Seriously.....why do you even try this ******* ****?

The AR 15 and the 5.56×45mm flesh obliterating round go together like......uhhhhhh.....A and R.
 

Cedar » 09 Jun 2022, 1:34 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 1:34 pm

The Texas shooter didn't use an AR-15.

Huey » 09 Jun 2022, 1:31 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 1:31 pm

I have nothing to be desperate about.  You have been beaten at every turn. 

That is for you to tell. I can't tell your version of the truth.

Huey » 09 Jun 2022, 1:30 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 1:30 pm

There is no lie.  Today you are wrapped up because the ammo was specifically made for the Armalite Rifle 15.  Cool.  Well, today, any number of weapons use that same ammo WITH THE SAME AFFECT.  Also, today's ar 15s fire a variety of different ammo.  So your issue is with the ammo.

Blackvegetable » 09 Jun 2022, 1:37 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 1:37 pm

No need to read past the lie.

There is no lie.  Today you are wrapped up because the ammo was specifically made for the Armalite Rifle 15.  Cool.  Well, today, any number of weapons use that same ammo WITH THE SAME AFFECT.  Also, today's ar 15s fire a variety of different ammo.  So your issue is with the ammo.

Huey » 09 Jun 2022, 1:47 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 1:47 pm

So make your point.  I posted the first post where you mentioned rounds designed for the Armalite Rifle 15.  So there is no lie.  I addressed your comments.

I'll look for more.  But, it would be nice for once if you clearly state your position.

Blackvegetable » 08 Jun 2022, 4:16 pm » wrote: ↑

08 Jun 2022, 4:16 pm

ConsRule » 08 Jun 2022, 3:52 pm » wrote: ↑

08 Jun 2022, 3:52 pm

That is a lie. He was NOT inside the school or present while bodies were being identified.  He is simply (at best) recounting what was told him. It's not out of the realm of possibilities that he (or whomever told him) is making **** up.

Stoner changed all these variables by reducing the bullet weight, increasing velocity, and reducing the rotation rate. When these bullets struck a body, they behaved erratically. This began with a tumbling effect wherein the bullet began cartwheeling through tissue, creating a much wider and more ragged channel with its long axis, rather than its diameter. In addition to instability in orientation, the 5.56mm bullets were also unstable in direction. When encountering bone or different tissue density, the bullets would carom off, making a new path of destruction. Rather than a straight tunnel, the 5.56mm bullets would tear a zigzag channel with more lateral cavitation than other calibers. This explains the comments of some doctors that wounds from these rounds “look like a bomb had gone off in there.” And they also explain how even when wounds are sewn up, they sometimes collapse. This indicates semi-permanent cavitation where, even though a structure has survived, it has suffered such deep fibrous tearing that it can no longer support itself. There is a general medical opinion that wounds to the thorax with this caliber are typically fatal.

https://www.library.ucdavis.edu/exhibit ... -violence/ 

 

Blackvegetable » 09 Jun 2022, 1:51 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 1:51 pm

Huey » 09 Jun 2022, 1:47 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jun 2022, 1:47 pm

So make your point.  I posted the first post where you mentioned rounds designed for the Armalite Rifle 15.  So there is no lie.  I addressed your comments.

I'll look for more.  But, it would be nice for once if you clearly state your position.

The point is that there is no point in reading past the lie.

Acknowledge that the obvious has been explained, again.