[teenagegunwacho]

watchin yall argue is fun

[JMcDonald]

Quote:       Originally Posted by knightRider

screw it i m outta this thread . come on Jim lets leave him alone .

So are you guys buddies or something? That explains alot...

[JMcDonald]

Oh and lastly, for your "shoot first and ask questions later" kind of people, check out Mike's "at war with the world?" thread. A lot of good advice in there, much of which discusses how one should avoid confrontation and hostilities when possible, as not only does it put one in danger during the shuffle, but could come back to bite them later on down the road.

[Laufer]

JMcDonald:

I would be willing to contradict somebody but only have plinking-versus hunting experience, therefore my views are not so valid.
If the huge gap in economics between .22 and 7.62x39 or .223 rounds etc is a critical factor, I still would not suggest putting all of one's "ammo eggs in one (very small round) basket unless that person has at least two similar carbines which have all functioned perfectly with large magazines using the same exact round(s).

Pardon the digression-my primary concern deals with situational awareness: how a civilian can quickly spot trouble in a first-time encounter with sporadic anarchy in the streets (with no 'front lines'). This and a full tank of gas might negate the advantage of an SKS or Mini 14 versus a Ruger 10/22. Other than hearing shots hit a car (mine was hit by a paintball round from kids hiding behind trees and did not know what it was until I pulled over down the road-I quickly returned and walked into the trees at my own risk but they were gone). Sometimes there can be strong hints of trouble after a natural disaster, but what if a rare power black-out hit a city for just a while, and you must then drive into a city area to meet/pick somebody up, having bad vibes before you leave? Do you take a handgun, and if your smallest gun is a Ruger carbine, would you leave it at home and go in somewhat unarmed with only a sheathed knife between the car seats?

How do you guys define the minimum 'area problem' which can quickly escalate, but is not defined, in and of itself, as dangerous? Let's exclude a political (ethnic) leader being assassinated, although we would not know it unless our television is on a news channel when we leave home- but what if the car is tuned to a local FM radio channel or Sirius/XM radio?

Who has been in this situation where lawlessness is just beginning to break out but nobody passing by realizes it, as with the helpless truck driver and others stuck in South Central LA? People working in a shop/static location notice changes outside, but not many passersby outside their scheduled routine.

[jimkim]

Quote:       Originally Posted by Laufer

JMcDonald: I would be willing to contradict somebody but only have plinking-versus hunting experience, therefore my views are not so valid. If the huge gap in economics between .22 and 7.62x39 or .223 rounds etc is a critical factor, I still would not suggest putting all of one's "ammo eggs in one (very small round) basket unless that person has at least two similar carbines which have all functioned perfectly with large magazines using the same exact round(s). Pardon the digression-my primary concern deals with situational awareness: how a civilian can quickly spot trouble in a first-time encounter with sporadic anarchy in the streets (with no 'front lines'). This and a full tank of gas might negate the advantage of an SKS or Mini 14 versus a Ruger 10/22. Other than hearing shots hit a car (mine was hit by a paintball round from kids hiding behind trees and did not know what it was until I pulled over down the road-I quickly returned and walked into the trees at my own risk but they were gone). Sometimes there can be strong hints of trouble after a natural disaster, but what if a rare power black-out hit a city for just a while, and you must then drive into a city area to meet/pick somebody up, having bad vibes before you leave? Do you take a handgun, and if your smallest gun is a Ruger carbine, would you leave it at home and go in somewhat unarmed with only a sheathed knife between the car seats? How do you guys define the minimum 'area problem' which can quickly escalate, but is not defined, in and of itself, as dangerous? Let's exclude a political (ethnic) leader being assassinated, although we would not know it unless our television is on a news channel when we leave home- but what if the car is tuned to a local FM radio channel or Sirius/XM radio? Who has been in this situation where lawlessness is just beginning to break out but nobody passing by realizes it, as with the helpless truck driver and others stuck in South Central LA? People working in a shop/static location notice changes outside, but not many passersby outside their scheduled routine.

yep.

[wunhunglo]

Jeez, this thread has dragged on a bit. Quite an achievement for just a .22!!

[jimkim]

Quote:       Originally Posted by wunhunglo

Jeez, this thread has dragged on a bit. Quite an achievement for just a .22!!

Yep...............lol

[Mike Franklin]

"So, if nobody else can actually TELL ME MY STATEMENTS ARE INCORRECT******"

Nearly everyone has tried.

[billy]

Quote:       Originally Posted by billy

i dont think in the history of the internet has bitching at each other changed a mind .

so....
has everybodies minds been changed?



thats what i thought.

[JMcDonald]

Quote:       Originally Posted by Mike Franklin

"So, if nobody else can actually TELL ME MY STATEMENTS ARE INCORRECT******" Nearly everyone has tried.

Actually, those who have tried have really only called me stupid. I posted an overview of all my current standpoints, the ones after the asterisks you quoted, and so far nobody has even tried to argue that any of those specifically are incorrect.

Billy, it is correct that bitching over the web doesn't do much in the way of changing minds. However, I guess I expected a much more mature discussion than what was brought by many, so I apologize for that. However, in my defense, the first thread was filled with much insight, so I assumed it could be repeated, but apparently it can't. Maybe the stars aligned and brought all the right G&G members to that thread, and there was no such luck to be found here?


But, Ill leave it with this:
"Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance"- Albert Einstein. That is, disbelieving or discrediting something without first investigating the facts is essentially the definition of ignorance, which is not only includes a general lack of knowledge on a subject, but "A willful neglect or refusal to acquire knowledge," according to the dictionary. Thus, because many of you simply refuse to accept the FACTS Ive presented, you are, by definition, ignorant. The fact that you continually skirt around my arguments and even contradict your own further supports that statement.

Thank you to those who attempted to uphold a positive, informed discussion.

[tommy]

alot of people talk about a .22 not being able to take down big game but down fere we use them .22's to take down 10'/11' aligators at 25/30 yards away. now to me and i don't know about ya'll but an aligator has just about the toughest shell to penetrate in my book. i think in a 50/60 yard range maybe more the .22's are really deadly. i wouldn't shoot a gator with a .9mm because i have seen them just bounce off the gators head but the .22's go right into them and 99%of the time it's a one shot kill too. now we do pop another round into them when you get them close and your draggin them into the boat because you never want a pissed off 10' gator comin to after you shot him and it's just you him and your buddy in the boat it ain't a nice place to be.lmao

[squirrelblaster]

this thread has earned my pattented "i like turtles!" award!

[wunhunglo]

OK. Here's a viable SHTF scenario for you: You are walking through the bush, carrying your "supremely viable SHTF weapon" and you disturb this thing, who on being disturbed from having his breakfast/lunch/dinner takes great exception to you. Do you still have every confidence that you can deal with the situation or do you rethink about what might be a more suitable calibre & type of weapon?

(I know Billy would be OK ços he'd have a 416)'

[tommy]

i would climb the nearest tree and then wait for him to calm down and then take a pop shot at his eyes that would be the best way to drop him if you have a small caliber gun because that hide is some tuff stuff.

[wunhunglo]

Quote:       Originally Posted by tommy

i would climb the nearest tree and then wait for him to calm down and then take a pop shot at his eyes that would be the best way to drop him if you have a small caliber gun because that hide is some tuff stuff.

Have you checked out the nearest trees???
They don't call it "the bush" for nothing!

[tommy]

there are trees right behind him in the picture. i only weigh 138lbs so i can climb a cat tail and not bend it.lol if there wasn't a tree i think i would take a stand and start shootin for the nuckle joints on his legs that would drop him then i would try to finish him off.animal can't run with no legs.

[wunhunglo]

Quote:       Originally Posted by tommy

there are trees right behind him in the picture. i only weigh 138lbs so i can climb a cat tail and not bend it.lol if there wasn't a tree i think i would take a stand and start shootin for the nuckle joints on his legs that would drop him then i would try to finish him off.animal can't run with no legs.

Most of the trees in the background are long dead and so would you be if you tried to hide up one. A ton of rhino hitting one of those things would soon shake you out, assuming that the thing didn't break first!

Good idea on shooting out his knee joints though; wonder why the big game hunters never considered doing that??

[tommy]

i was always taught that the weakest link of the biggest man was his knees and the same hold true for the animals.beside thats the skinniest part of the animal as for as penetrating to a bone . i a;ways thought about what i would do if i had to shoot someone in self defense and the same answer allways come up i would give them a chance for a new life by shooting thier knees out and if they still insisted on trying to shoot me well then i would shoot to kill but my first shots would be to take out their legs. i would hate to kill anyone but if i have to i would.

[JMcDonald]

Heh.

First off, if I were in African Bush then most of the concerns that justify a small-caliber weapon will be gone. There will be no concern for thousands of desparate city-folk running around trying to steal everything they can. There will be little concern for a loud report calling attention to myself. There will be little concern for carrying hundreds of rounds of ammo, as I would undoubtedly have a support vehicle. Thus, Id very likely have a much more powerful rifle (probably a Mosin-Nagant).

Second, few (if any) of the guns we've been comparing will reliably take out a rhino, so this point is kindof moot. Though, Id love it if with me I had some over-confident guy with an AK... then I could run while he stayed and tried to fight it. He'd get mauled, the rhino would then be satisfied, and Id be on my way.

However, in that scenario I would slowly back away, and if it charged Id wait til the last second and jump / dive / run to the side, which is what you are supposed to do. If it seemed persistant, I might also consider shooting at it between the evasions, with the hopes that I hit it in the eyes or nose.

*edit*

And Tommy, my understanding as far as that goes is that to intentionally maim someone is legally about as bad as killing them. Though, if its a conscience thing then I don't expect you to change, but I do hope nothing bad happens because of it.

[wunhunglo]

Quote:       Originally Posted by JMcDonald

Heh. First off, if I were in African Bush then most of the concerns that justify a small-caliber weapon will be gone. There will be no concern for thousands of desparate city-folk running around trying to steal everything they can. There will be little concern for a loud report calling attention to myself. There will be little concern for carrying hundreds of rounds of ammo, as I would undoubtedly have a support vehicle. Thus, Id very likely have a much more powerful rifle (probably a Mosin-Nagant). Second, few (if any) of the guns we've been comparing will reliably take out a rhino, so this point is kindof moot. Though, Id love it if with me I had some over-confident guy with an AK... then I could run while he stayed and tried to fight it. He'd get mauled, the rhino would then be satisfied, and Id be on my way. However, in that scenario I would slowly back away, and if it charged Id wait til the last second and jump / dive / run to the side, which is what you are supposed to do. If it seemed persistant, I might also consider shooting at it between the evasions, with the hopes that I hit it in the eyes or nose. *edit* And Tommy, my understanding as far as that goes is that to intentionally maim someone is legally about as bad as killing them. Though, if its a conscience thing then I don't expect you to change, but I do hope nothing bad happens because of it.

The first bit I've highlighted made me laugh; you've obviously never been anywhere near Africa. Everybody is always trying to steal everything they can!

Second bit is one of the sad facts of life in Africa in that the AK47 is the most common poachers tool in all the countries and has taken all sorts of game including many many rhino.