So, the target with scoring rings is irrelevant. Thank you for pointing that out.
-
Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum
Who Shouldnt Have Guns?
- Thread starter Bunz
- Start date
So, the target with scoring rings is irrelevant. Thank you for pointing that out.
Werbung:
For the record.
Just to set the record straight.
The concentric rings(scoring rings) on paper targets are utilized by most hunters as an aid to zeroing a rifle. I prefer a target with a 1 inch bull and the entire surface imprinted with a 1 inch grid...but most targets available have scoring rings. Scoring rings on a target do not indicate any insidious purpose of the shooter.
Hunters of today hunt for sport and to supplement(usually not subsistence hunt), the meats found in super markets. Wood duck is a favorite of mine as is wild goose and pheasant. Beef, pork, chicken, and turkey become boring. Therefore, a statement that "I hunt to feed my family..." is not disingenuous. I grew up eating deer, duck, rabbit, squirrel, and ruffed grouse.
Most rifles do not come with scopes. The scopes are almost always purchased separately. Many rifles today do not come with iron sights mounted and are intended to be used with scopes.
Shooting a five shot group is an arbitrary number when zeroing a rifle. It has nothing to do with standard deviation. A ten shot group would be a better indicator of a rifle's capability, but would result in too much heat absorbed by the barrel(in a sporter weight barrel). Also, ten shots in a center-fire is half a box of expensive ammo.
Most rifles have an effective range (not maximum range) of much less than 1000 meters. The people who have the equipment and skill to consistently strike a 12 inch bull at 1000 meters is likely less than 1% of shooters/hunters. 1000 meter "kills" on human size or large game targets are mostly read about in fictional novels and movies, luck not withstanding.
Paper targets are the standard in most shooting(exception being "reactive"type targets that are usually steel and meant to tip over at the bullet strike), including the most precise of the shooting sports, bench rest competition. Any "warping" of a target is not statistically significant. In fact with high velocity bullets, the paper will not tear at all; the bullet powders the paper resulting in a clean caliber-size hole that appears to be punched. The position of paper target is not effected.
Police do not spend "years" practicing their skills with firearms. Some are loath to practice, some practice often. There are many civilian shooters who are unusually skilled especially if they are shooting sports competitors. I have witnessed and have police friends who are not particularly knowledgeable or skilled with their firearms. The people who run the training camps for police, and other combat shooters are civilians.
Most shooters (few) do not use human-shaped targets. My favorite sport is bowling pin shooting (a timed pistol event). The most popular pistol shooting sports currently use round steel targets (falling plates)
However, I will confess to fantasizing about killing those bowling pins when I shoot.
All guns were not designed for the purpose of shooting human beings or even animals for that matter. Case in point, I have a Browning BT-99 Trap gun that was designed to be used only for Trap shooting that it is impractical to use for any other purpose. It has no safety as it was intended to be empty until it is your turn to fire and then loaded and fired immediately after loading. It is weighed to point of being too heavy to carry in the field.
If you were familiar with a Hammerli Rapid Fire Olympic pistol it is painfully obvious that it has no other purpose than competition.
Statistics are available (NRA website)that indicate that during the last few years the crime rate has diminished in the United States. In the last few years, most states have enacted laws that allow the average citizen to carry a concealed weapon.
"...ask any police officer..." Is an appeal to authority; which any first-year logic student knows is not an acceptable argument. Also, it presupposes that they somehow are more knowledgeable about some subject than others. The sad truth is that most of the police officers I have dealt with in my 64 years have been dullards. There has only been one(Female Mich. State Police Officer, that I know personally) that demonstrated professionalism and more than above average intelligence. Especially disappointing are small town police and sheriff departments. The average intelligence(I.Q.) of a human is 100. Local police departments reflect that average. To view the average police officer as an authority on any subject is without merit.
It has been implied in these posts that gun owners are mentally unsound due to their interest in firearms. I spent many hours studying psychiatry and psychology(normal and abnormal); I have found no evident pathology by virtue of an interest in firearms. Firearm competitors, hunters appear to be well socialized and pathology free.
Examine if you will, the tone of the posts in this thread. Do you notice anyone who seems not to be able to relate the others in a positive way, but posts with accusations, antagonism and belligerence?
Just to set the record straight.
The concentric rings(scoring rings) on paper targets are utilized by most hunters as an aid to zeroing a rifle. I prefer a target with a 1 inch bull and the entire surface imprinted with a 1 inch grid...but most targets available have scoring rings. Scoring rings on a target do not indicate any insidious purpose of the shooter.
Hunters of today hunt for sport and to supplement(usually not subsistence hunt), the meats found in super markets. Wood duck is a favorite of mine as is wild goose and pheasant. Beef, pork, chicken, and turkey become boring. Therefore, a statement that "I hunt to feed my family..." is not disingenuous. I grew up eating deer, duck, rabbit, squirrel, and ruffed grouse.
Most rifles do not come with scopes. The scopes are almost always purchased separately. Many rifles today do not come with iron sights mounted and are intended to be used with scopes.
Shooting a five shot group is an arbitrary number when zeroing a rifle. It has nothing to do with standard deviation. A ten shot group would be a better indicator of a rifle's capability, but would result in too much heat absorbed by the barrel(in a sporter weight barrel). Also, ten shots in a center-fire is half a box of expensive ammo.
Most rifles have an effective range (not maximum range) of much less than 1000 meters. The people who have the equipment and skill to consistently strike a 12 inch bull at 1000 meters is likely less than 1% of shooters/hunters. 1000 meter "kills" on human size or large game targets are mostly read about in fictional novels and movies, luck not withstanding.
Paper targets are the standard in most shooting(exception being "reactive"type targets that are usually steel and meant to tip over at the bullet strike), including the most precise of the shooting sports, bench rest competition. Any "warping" of a target is not statistically significant. In fact with high velocity bullets, the paper will not tear at all; the bullet powders the paper resulting in a clean caliber-size hole that appears to be punched. The position of paper target is not effected.
Police do not spend "years" practicing their skills with firearms. Some are loath to practice, some practice often. There are many civilian shooters who are unusually skilled especially if they are shooting sports competitors. I have witnessed and have police friends who are not particularly knowledgeable or skilled with their firearms. The people who run the training camps for police, and other combat shooters are civilians.
Most shooters (few) do not use human-shaped targets. My favorite sport is bowling pin shooting (a timed pistol event). The most popular pistol shooting sports currently use round steel targets (falling plates)
However, I will confess to fantasizing about killing those bowling pins when I shoot.
All guns were not designed for the purpose of shooting human beings or even animals for that matter. Case in point, I have a Browning BT-99 Trap gun that was designed to be used only for Trap shooting that it is impractical to use for any other purpose. It has no safety as it was intended to be empty until it is your turn to fire and then loaded and fired immediately after loading. It is weighed to point of being too heavy to carry in the field.
If you were familiar with a Hammerli Rapid Fire Olympic pistol it is painfully obvious that it has no other purpose than competition.
Statistics are available (NRA website)that indicate that during the last few years the crime rate has diminished in the United States. In the last few years, most states have enacted laws that allow the average citizen to carry a concealed weapon.
"...ask any police officer..." Is an appeal to authority; which any first-year logic student knows is not an acceptable argument. Also, it presupposes that they somehow are more knowledgeable about some subject than others. The sad truth is that most of the police officers I have dealt with in my 64 years have been dullards. There has only been one(Female Mich. State Police Officer, that I know personally) that demonstrated professionalism and more than above average intelligence. Especially disappointing are small town police and sheriff departments. The average intelligence(I.Q.) of a human is 100. Local police departments reflect that average. To view the average police officer as an authority on any subject is without merit.
It has been implied in these posts that gun owners are mentally unsound due to their interest in firearms. I spent many hours studying psychiatry and psychology(normal and abnormal); I have found no evident pathology by virtue of an interest in firearms. Firearm competitors, hunters appear to be well socialized and pathology free.
Examine if you will, the tone of the posts in this thread. Do you notice anyone who seems not to be able to relate the others in a positive way, but posts with accusations, antagonism and belligerence?
Jarlaxle
Well-Known Member
Nummy
For instance, the Coriolis Effect upon projectile dispersion at extended range. Lead Styphenate and Nitrocellulose. Austinetic, Martensetic, and Ferritic stainless steels. The molecular phases of heat treat including Austinite and Martinsite. Cast Bullet alloys that include lead, tin, antimony, and arsenic. Composition of Brass (copper and zinc), and the heat treatment there of. Heat treatment of lead alloy cast bullets. etc., etc.
Furthermore, the history of firearms is also a worthy intellectual pursuit. The reasoning behind Major Schofield's modifications to Smith and Wesson's Model 3. The significance of the hidden set triggers in Hamilton's dueling pistols(Hamilton-Burr duel).
Given the above, anyone who would say: "...Since when is a knowledge of firearms considered an intellectual pursuit, hmmm?", has demonstrated that they lack the knowledge to make that determination and just seeks to be provocative.
One of the factors that interested me in firearms is that unlike many things, it is open ended in that it can be a very simple past time or can be studied as to its relativity to the sciences. The sciences that can be involved in firearms are: mathematics including geometry, calculus, physics, and trigonometry. Also included are chemistry, metallurgy.
For instance, the Coriolis Effect upon projectile dispersion at extended range. Lead Styphenate and Nitrocellulose. Austinetic, Martensetic, and Ferritic stainless steels. The molecular phases of heat treat including Austinite and Martinsite. Cast Bullet alloys that include lead, tin, antimony, and arsenic. Composition of Brass (copper and zinc), and the heat treatment there of. Heat treatment of lead alloy cast bullets. etc., etc.
Furthermore, the history of firearms is also a worthy intellectual pursuit. The reasoning behind Major Schofield's modifications to Smith and Wesson's Model 3. The significance of the hidden set triggers in Hamilton's dueling pistols(Hamilton-Burr duel).
Given the above, anyone who would say: "...Since when is a knowledge of firearms considered an intellectual pursuit, hmmm?", has demonstrated that they lack the knowledge to make that determination and just seeks to be provocative.
Mare Tranquillity
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 15, 2007
- Messages
- 3,477
Getting back to the orginal post's question, it seems to me after reading Jar's posts and yours, that the one person posting here who should NOT have a gun is the one arguing with you guys.
On a personal note, I sold or gave away my guns 30+ years ago when I realized that I was not going to fit in all that well in what passes for society in this country and I didn't want to take the risk of shooting someone. I was living in fairly backward area during that part of my life, I'd had guns pulled on me, aimed at me, had my life threatened, and I realized that I didn't want to do that to someone else. I find the technology of guns interesting and I read about them some, I find the advances in technology fascinating. That new rail-gun the Navy has made that shoots hundreds of miles with non-explosive projectiles that do the damage to their target with kinetic energy are going to make the ships that carry them safer since there are no explosives necessary to shoot them. Thanks for some interesting posts.
Mare Tranquillity
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 15, 2007
- Messages
- 3,477
I wrote a long response to this post of yours, Dah, but even though I reread it on the thread after posting it somehow in the change to the new server it got deleted. I've no interest in trying to recreate it and I suppose that the mods don't have access to the old site documents so they probably can't retrieve it either... excrement happens. It was just the reminisces of an old person anyway.
Or maybe it was so subversive that the Homeland Security guys deleted it, it was about a time in American life when we didn't have the fascists running the country, suborning the Constitution, and setting aside the Bill of Rights, nor was torture a legal policy of the American government.
Re: Nummy
****ing in your pants have causes that are explainable by science although I doubt if anyone would call it an intellectual pursuit. Your post on 'zeroing in' is nothing more than the application of standard distribution to a normal statistical field.
A target with scoring rings is irrelevant to this since ANY target can be used just as easily and effectively. This sort of target is used for sport -- which you use in an attempt to hide the true purpose of a firearm -- to kill.
****ing in your pants have causes that are explainable by science although I doubt if anyone would call it an intellectual pursuit. Your post on 'zeroing in' is nothing more than the application of standard distribution to a normal statistical field.
A target with scoring rings is irrelevant to this since ANY target can be used just as easily and effectively. This sort of target is used for sport -- which you use in an attempt to hide the true purpose of a firearm -- to kill.
Which succintly proves my point on its purpose.
Jarlaxle
Well-Known Member
Re: Nummy
No, it is used for zeroing in (makes figuring the exact adjustments easier, especially at long range), and for scoring some types of competitive shooting.
No, it is used for zeroing in (makes figuring the exact adjustments easier, especially at long range), and for scoring some types of competitive shooting.
"...Your post on 'zeroing in' is nothing more than the application of standard distribution to a normal statistical field. "
Please explain the process in detail, Nummie. How is the application of standard distribution to a normal statistical field used to zero-in a hunting rifle?
Please explain the process in detail, Nummie. How is the application of standard distribution to a normal statistical field used to zero-in a hunting rifle?
Werbung:
A normally distributed statistical field has a confidence level equal to integral increments of the standard deviation.
If your rifle shoots outside this tolerance limit, it means that the optical axis of your telescope is deflected from the axis of your barrel -- hence the need to adjust the scope.
Duh?
Similar threads
