Who Shouldnt Have Guns?

[numinus]

Numinus,

Again, you have no idea what your talking about. I live in western Alaska, go to wiki and look up the Bush Alaska article and it might give you some insight. As for permanent law enforcement, in my village we do have law enforcement. There are others nearby who have none. So if a murder were to happen then the Alaska State Troopers would have to fly out to investigate at the next opportunity considering weather.

As I said, the right to bear arms stems from the absence of a professional military and police -- during the conception of union as it is where you live.

Firstly, I am sorry to hear about the loss of your friend. But if someone in high school accidently shoots thier friend, it says a few things to me.
A, that person and thier parents should be held liable for the actions of someone with a gun in thier hands.
B. Of course no gun is idiot proof, I dont think anyone would disagree. But again, it is the responsibility of the person in possession to keep the barrel in a safe direction at all times.
C. I hope your friend does carry guilt with him and takes the time to teach kids about the very simple safety rules of being around firearms. He took the life of someone through his own ignorant and negligent actions.

Correct. And this tragedy is repeated year after year in a more or less constant statistical occurence. You would imagine that, with all your talk of responsibility and education in gun use, the figures should be getting less and less to the point where it is immaterial. No such luck, Im afraid.

Again, it is the responsibility of the user to ensure the business end of a gun is pointed in a safe direction with a proper backstop. Anyone who shoots rounds into the air or in a direction not known to be safe is an idiot and probably took gun lessons from you.

http://www.allcountries.org/gun_deaths_by_country.html

Only a cowboy redneck would choose to ignore facts, especially when the issue involves their favorite passtime -- shooting the hell out of anything that moves.

 

[numinus]

You might want to check out Bunz's location before making any such sweeping commentary.
You know, before you go saying someone else is lying or is ignorant, or whatever, try doing a search or two to update your own information.

And you might want to actually employ some critical thought on what he is saying.

Using targets with SCORING RINGS should suggest to any reasonable individual that he wasn't callibrating his scope -- hence the lie he was blatantly peddling in this thread.

 

[PLC1]

And you might want to actually employ some critical thought on what he is saying.

Using targets with SCORING RINGS should suggest to any reasonable individual that he wasn't callibrating his scope -- hence the lie he was blatantly peddling in this thread.

You don't have a whole lot of experience with rifles, do you?

If you're going to hunt for meat, it is a good idea to sight in the rifle first, and to do a little target practice so that you hit what you aim at.

You don't just pick up a rifle and blast away. It takes skill to get the bullet where you want it.

 

[numinus]

You don't have a whole lot of experience with rifles, do you?

If you're going to hunt for meat, it is a good idea to sight in the rifle first, and to do a little target practice so that you hit what you aim at.

You don't just pick up a rifle and blast away. It takes skill to get the bullet where you want it.

Nonsense.

To callibrate a rifle scope, you merely need to sight at a suitably small target from a pre-determined distance. The downward displacement of a bullet fired is a mathematical function of the eccentricity of the scope's lens axis and the horizontal distance.

THERE IS NO NEED FOR TARGETS WITH SCORING RINGS.

 

[PLC1]

Nonsense.

To callibrate a rifle scope, you merely need to sight at a suitably small target from a pre-determined distance. The downward displacement of a bullet fired is a mathematical function of the eccentricity of the scope's lens axis and the horizontal distance.

THERE IS NO NEED FOR TARGETS WITH SCORING RINGS.

No, not unless you want to get to where you can actually hit someting with your rifle.

Did you ever get around to checking out Bunz's location, and how it might relate to his experience with and attitude toward rifles?

Ever fire a rifle yourself?

 

[dahermit]

And you might want to actually employ some critical thought on what he is saying.

Using targets with SCORING RINGS should suggest to any reasonable individual that he wasn't callibrating his scope -- hence the lie he was blatantly peddling in this thread.

As a life long firearm owner who has zeroed in many firearms, scoring rings are used to zero in a rifle (no one experienced with firearms calls zeroing in "calibrating a scope"). Scoring rings exist on most targets because the targets are multi-use items...for competition or zeroing in a rifle. For your information, a five-shot group is usually shot on the target and then the scope's adjustments are used to bring the next shot or group to the desired point of aim.

It is quite obvious to me that you wish to sound knowledgeable about firearms, but sound as ridicules as I would sound if I tried to pass my self off as a physicist. Your lack of knowledge of all elements of firearms is painfully obvious.

 

[Jarlaxle]

You're the one infatuated with guns and I'm the one with a 'dark, fetid' mind? What absolute nonsense.

You REALLY need to stop projecting your own faults onm the rest of the world. Seek professional help.

And you would know about horse manure, eh.

HEE-HAW!

More infantile personal attacks...nothing new here.

Hooliganism runs in your family, it seems.

Yet more infantile personal attacks...again, nothing new and nothing actually requiring thought on nummi's part.

"Excuse me, ma'm but i'm going to rape you in a few minutes."

HEE-HAW!

Are you baked?

There is but it is beyond your puny capabilities, I'm afraid.

Again, you MUST stop projecting your own inadequacies on others!

A weapon's effectivity, especially for self-defense, depends on DEGREES OF CONTROL. Otherwise, how can one adhere to the principle of NON-CULPABLE SELF-DEFENSE, hmmm?

Yet more five-dollar words from nummi's five-cent mind, full, of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

Duh?

I didn't say 'prohibition', did I?p

Yes, you certainly did.

HEE-HAW!

I'm glad you find yourself so amusing.

I do not propose to insult you other than tell you what you actually are.

Right. Smoke another one, dumbass.

Not when the target shoots back.

Yet more proof (as if any was needed) that you couldn't buy a clue if you won the lottery.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Scoring rings exist on most targets because the targets are multi-use items...for competition or zeroing in a rifle

They also make figuring the adjustments much easier, since the exact amount of error is easy to determine...been there, done that. You CAN zero in without them (my uncle has), but it's a heck of a lot easier with them.

Also, it's nice for figuring bullet drop at various distances--shoot at targets from, say, 50, 100, 200, and 250 yards, and you can get a pretty good idea of the bullet's exact flight path.

Speaking of which, my uncle has some ammo ready (he hand-loads) for his elephant rifle...shooting it tomorrow, I think.

 

[numinus]

No, not unless you want to get to where you can actually hit someting with your rifle.

That is exactly how you callibrate your rifle scope. The principle applies to precise geodetic instruments as well, fyi.

Did you ever get around to checking out Bunz's location, and how it might relate to his experience with and attitude toward rifles?

How is it relevant, hmmm?

Do you wish me to discuss the differences between alaska and new york vis-a-vis the 'right' to bear firearms.

Ever fire a rifle yourself?

Of course.

 

[numinus]

As a life long firearm owner who has zeroed in many firearms, scoring rings are used to zero in a rifle (no one experienced with firearms calls zeroing in "calibrating a scope").

Tell me how that would make any difference on the lens equations, hmmm?

Scoring rings exist on most targets because the targets are multi-use items...for competition or zeroing in a rifle. For your information, a five-shot group is usually shot on the target and then the scope's adjustments are used to bring the next shot or group to the desired point of aim.

How is that different from what I said, hmmm?

Isn't a rifle scope merely a compound lens -- the accuracy of which is dependent on its longitudinal axis?

And do you even know why you need 5 shots? I'll give you a hint -- it has something to do with standard deviations.

It is quite obvious to me that you wish to sound knowledgeable about firearms, but sound as ridicules as I would sound if I tried to pass my self off as a physicist. Your lack of knowledge of all elements of firearms is painfully obvious.

The scope of a rifle is no different from the telescope of a precise geodetic instrument -- they are all compound lenses, they have cross-hairs and most often fiducial marks, actual distances are functions of the lens constant, and last, but not the least, they are adjusted for systematic and statistical errors.

Other than the use of terms, would you mind telling me exactly where I said anything wrong.

Oh, btw, callibrating a telescope requires a target that does not warp easily. It would be better to forgo the scoring rings.

 

[numinus]

You REALLY need to stop projecting your own faults onm the rest of the world. Seek professional help.

Try to look at demographics on firearm related crimes and you can see that there is precious little that separates you from a violent felon.

More infantile personal attacks...nothing new here.

As I recall, the first few posts you made in this forum where nothing but personal attacks. So who exactly is projecting, eh?

Yet more infantile personal attacks...again, nothing new and nothing actually requiring thought on nummi's part.

You actually think responding to your posts require any thought? You overestimate your capabilities.

Are you baked?

No, but I see you are, since you missed the obvious point -- that a rapist wouldn't tell his victim he is planning to rape her. Unless of course, the rapist is you.

Again, you MUST stop projecting your own inadequacies on others!

You're the gun enthusiast and I'm the one with inadequacies???

Try penile anxiety.

Yet more five-dollar words from nummi's five-cent mind, full, of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

I'm sure a cowboy redneck wouldn't know anything about non-culpable self-defense. Just start shooting and think later. HEE HAW!

Yes, you certainly did.

I see you're illiterate as well.

I'm glad you find yourself so amusing.

I find YOU amusing. HEE HAW!

Right. Smoke another one, dumbass.

All you can think of is 'dumbass'? I hope you didn't hurt yourself much thinking that up.

Yet more proof (as if any was needed) that you couldn't buy a clue if you won the lottery.

Just as I thought. No intellectual substance, whatsoever.

 

[numinus]

They also make figuring the adjustments much easier, since the exact amount of error is easy to determine...been there, done that. You CAN zero in without them (my uncle has), but it's a heck of a lot easier with them.

Also, it's nice for figuring bullet drop at various distances--shoot at targets from, say, 50, 100, 200, and 250 yards, and you can get a pretty good idea of the bullet's exact flight path.

Speaking of which, my uncle has some ammo ready (he hand-loads) for his elephant rifle...shooting it tomorrow, I think.

That's what fiducial marks are for. At least you're uncle is using his head.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Try to look at demographics on firearm related crimes and you can see that there is precious little that separates you from a violent felon.

Are you stoned or stupid?

As I recall, the first few posts you made in this forum where nothing but personal attacks. So who exactly is projecting, eh?

Yet again: are you stoned or stupid?

You actually think responding to your posts require any thought? You overestimate your capabilities.

More projection.

No, but I see you are, since you missed the obvious point -- that a rapist wouldn't tell his victim he is planning to rape her. Unless of course, the rapist is you.

Are you baked, are you just trolling for kicks, or are you actually THIS ****ING STUPID?

You're the gun enthusiast and I'm the one with inadequacies???

More projection. Seek professional help.

Try penile anxiety.

You seem to be obsessed here...is there something in your past we should know about? Maybe involving a priest?

I'm sure a cowboy redneck wouldn't know anything about non-culpable self-defense. Just start shooting and think later. HEE HAW!

More asinine projection. Seek professional help.

I see you're illiterate as well.

Are you baked, stupid, or just trolling for kicks?

I find YOU amusing. HEE HAW!

Try cutting back on the drugs.

All you can think of is 'dumbass'? I hope you didn't hurt yourself much thinking that up.

You are very plainly a dumbass.

Just as I thought. No intellectual substance, whatsoever.

More projection. Youy really need to see a head shrinker about your problems.

Smoke another doobie, dimbulb.

 

[dahermit]

Numinus

It should be painfully obvious by now that Numinus is a pseudo-intellectual. He has no knowledge of firearms or anything else. He has however, an excess of time and access to a computer. His motive for posting here is most likely a desire to garner responses to his nonsense(trolling). He is likely a high school student who fancies himself a skilled debtor. He will continue to post as long as he can draw people into responding to him.

As Charles Manson did, he will use large words and terms that are intended to be confused with intellectualism. However, if you carefully consider what he says, you will surely conclude that most of what he says is gibberish. (...callibrating a telescope requires a target that does not warp easily..")

Lets give him the last word and ignore him from now on and he will eventually go back to trolling on "my space" with the rest of the children his age.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

It should be painfully obvious by now that Numinus is a pseudo-intellectual. He has no knowledge of firearms or anything else. He has however, an excess of time and access to a computer. His motive for posting here is most likely a desire to garner responses to his nonsense(trolling). He is likely a high school student who fancies himself a skilled debtor. He will continue to post as long as he can draw people into responding to him.

As Charles Manson did, he will use large words and terms that are intended to be confused with intellectualism. However, if you carefully consider what he says, you will surely conclude that most of what he says is gibberish. (...callibrating a telescope requires a target that does not warp easily..")

Lets give him the last word and ignore him from now on and he will eventually go back to trolling on "my space" with the rest of the children his age.

Hear, hear!