Canada proposes gun confiscation

He knows enough about them to know that they’re dangerous in the wrong hands.

It’s not rocket science.
Any rational person knows firearms are dangerous in the wrong hands.

Joe pretends he is an expert on guns and gives faulty advise.



 
What does the US government know about you?



Hold on, I seem to have misplaced my tinfoil hat...
 
Any rational person knows firearms are dangerous in the wrong hands.

Joe pretends he is an expert on guns and gives faulty advise.



A link from 2013? Not relevant.

Regardless, he doesn’t need to be an expert on guns. Your point is useless.
 
Regardless, he doesn’t need to be an expert on guns. Your point is useless.
.

That's the primary reason all the legislation they pass fails, and requires them to suggest more legislation is the answer ... :auiqs.jpg:

.
 
.

That's the primary reason all the legislation they pass fails, and requires them to suggest more legislation is the answer ... :auiqs.jpg:

.
No, it fails because they can’t get anything meaningful passed.
 
What’s the problem with having laws?
.

If you desire more meaningless legislation, then create more meaningless laws.
That's what the government wants, until you have relinquished all your Liberties ... Laws are their business and their product.

.
 
.

If you desire more meaningless legislation, then create more meaningless laws.
That's what the government wants, until you have relinquished all your Liberties ... Laws are their business and their product.

.
I don’t desire meaningless legislation. I desire meaningful legislation.
 
I don’t desire meaningless legislation. I desire meaningful legislation.
.

You were the one who posted ... "they can’t get anything meaningful passed."

My point was that it doesn't matter, and they will still keep passing shit.
When the shit they pass fails, they will tell you they need to pass more shit.

They will erode our Liberties due to their incompetence, and your desire to keep asking them to pass shit.

.
 


***snip***


Ballistics
This is the big question. Despite some pretty strange statements and non-standard science, the 9mm cannot produce a wound equal to the .45 ACP, given similar bullet technology. The .40 S&W and the .357 Magnum give superior results in testing. But then the 9mm can be enough with the proper load, and that is the bottom line. A loading with good quality control and cartridge integrity is the first choice. Every maker doesn’t have the same quality control, primer seal and case mouth seal, and especially bullet technology. The loading must maintain the balance of expansion and penetration. This means adequate penetration must not be compromised. This means 12 inches of water or gelatin. (Law enforcement, with the need to penetrate barriers and vehicles, needs more penetration.) It has enough energy to maintain high-velocity penetration and expansion.

No, the 9mm isn’t my choice for defense against a pack of feral dogs or a bear, but for most personal defense situations, the 9mm has the necessary power with proper loads to get the job done. And the best loads mean a lot! The 9mm FMJ loads we use for practice are poor defensive loads, but then few of us deploy a FMJ load if we have a choice. Good control, accuracy and a good balance of expansion and penetration work. As an example, Hornady recently introduced a 124-grain XTP +P load in the American Gunner line. This loading is affordable and offers excellent performance from my personal testing. Also, Winchester offers the PDX in 124-grain +P that offers excellent wound ballistics.
 
.

You were the one who posted ... "they can’t get anything meaningful passed."

My point was that it doesn't matter, and they will still keep passing shit.
When the shit they pass fails, they will tell you they need to pass more shit.

They will erode our Liberties due to their incompetence, and your desire to keep asking them to pass shit.

.
Of course they will keep passing meaningless shit because they can’t get anything meaningful passed.
 
Limited for liberty means something. Unfortunately, it is an ideal which escapes the majority of Americans.
 
He knows enough about them to know that they’re dangerous in the wrong hands.

It’s not rocket science.

Zatrite?

{ā€œWell, you know, my shotgun will do better for you than your AR-15, because you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door.ā€ Most people can handle a shotgun a hell of a lot better than they can a semiautomatic weapon in terms of both their aim and in terms of their ability to deter people coming. We can argue whether that’s true or not, but it is no argument that, for example, a shotgun could do the same job of protecting you.")

 
Zatrite?

{ā€œWell, you know, my shotgun will do better for you than your AR-15, because you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door.ā€ Most people can handle a shotgun a hell of a lot better than they can a semiautomatic weapon in terms of both their aim and in terms of their ability to deter people coming. We can argue whether that’s true or not, but it is no argument that, for example, a shotgun could do the same job of protecting you.")

Your links from 2013 aren’t helpful. And his gaffe about gun safety isn’t relevant to keeping guns out of the hands of murderers.

That’s quite the Reich.
 
Back
Top Bottom