Texas Church Shooting
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-11-2017, 06:42 PM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(08-11-2017 05:10 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  This seems a semantic debate over a nonsense term. (A term with no set definition) it's a sales marketing or media talk label.
It's a marketing term in the civilian world (Ford trucks use "military grade" aluminium) but in the military word it does have meaning. Mostly it's another word for milspec, equipment that meets the minimum standards set out by government for durability and reliability and the like.

It's also really important to make the distinction that because something meets the minimum quality standards for the government doesn't make it in function or capability comparable to what the military uses. Building a car from military grade aluminium won't make a manual transmition into an automatic.

(08-11-2017 05:10 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  To say it's am altered version but not what the military uses therefore not moilysry grade is to take the term to mean exactly what the military uses...
A civilian model lacks much of the functionality of a military counter part, specifically the fire selector for burst or fully automatic fire. It can still be "military grade" if it meets the minimum quality standards set out by the government as acceptable, but in that sense it's a pointless bar to clear. Military grade is not a designation for a weapon it's fire capabilities, it's a designation for the quality and reliability of the weapon. Saying we aught to ban military grade weapons means you want weapons to be made of shit parts that are unreliable (or dangerous to operate) that can't meet the already hilariously low standards set by government.

It doesn't really do anything to ban them.

(08-11-2017 05:10 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  but that's not a solely defined use of that term.
In the context of weapons outside of marketing jargon it is. It's a buzzword in the gun control debate, but it doesn't actually do anything.

(08-11-2017 05:10 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Military grade also is used in selling these types of civilian owned pieces of gear and guns to equate it to what is similar to military used equipment.
It's also used in the selling of trucks but it just means its as dependable and reliable as the minimum standards set forth by the government for military use. It doesn't change the lethality of the weapon. It's similar in quality (most civi guns are actually better, as military grade is a hilariously low bar to clear) but not similar in functionality when it comes to fire selection.


[/quote]

It is held that valour is the chiefest virtue and most dignifies the haver.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2017, 06:46 PM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(08-11-2017 05:17 PM)adey67 Wrote:  Just as a matter of interest and to help me understand the various viewpoints the difference between military grade weapons and civilian equivalents is it just a case of full auto 3round burst v semi auto capability or are there other differences as well ?

Military grade actually has nothing to do with the fire selector. A weapon is considered "military grade" if it passes the physical stress tests that the US militry makes weapons under go. An example being a weapon has to be capable of being completely submerged in mud for a set a mount of time and then fire it's entire magazine without jamming.


It's basically a fancy name for quality control. Very very low quality control. Most civilian weapons are actually better than the military counter part as the military relies on weapons made by the lowest bidder.

It is held that valour is the chiefest virtue and most dignifies the haver.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2017, 06:49 PM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(08-11-2017 05:29 PM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  Still don't get it, do you.

That you can't answer basic questions or respond to criticism of your position without being a evasive dishonest strawmanning twat? No I got it, trust me. I've given you multiple chances to defend your position or counter my argument and this marks the second or third time you have responded with a snarky fucking comment that adds nothing to the conversation.

If you have nothing to add that's fine, feel free to leave.

It is held that valour is the chiefest virtue and most dignifies the haver.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes WhiskeyDebates's post
08-11-2017, 07:06 PM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(08-11-2017 06:49 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
(08-11-2017 05:29 PM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  Still don't get it, do you.

That you can't answer basic questions or respond to criticism of your position without being a evasive dishonest strawmanning twat? No I got it, trust me. I've given you multiple chances to defend your position or counter my argument and this marks the second or third time you have responded with a snarky fucking comment that adds nothing to the conversation.

If you have nothing to add that's fine, feel free to leave.
In point of fact I don't see anything worth the effort.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2017, 09:13 PM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(08-11-2017 04:43 PM)Dom Wrote:  This whole discussion is for the birds and besides the point. Facepalm

Supposedly we have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

People with military grade weapons shooting into concerts and schools and churches violate that inalienable right.

Something needs to be done about it. It happens again and again.

No one needs to give up their precious guns as long as they are not military grade.

That is all.
None of the guns used in ANY of the mass shootings were military grade....


Don't berate me for your own failing to know the difference.

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-11-2017, 12:01 AM (This post was last modified: 09-11-2017 12:05 AM by Thumpalumpacus.)
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(08-11-2017 12:02 PM)onlinebiker Wrote:  
(07-11-2017 11:18 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  You still haven't explained why requiring smart guns going forward would limit your rights.

Because they don't exist?????

There is no company making anything that can be reliable enough to be considered operational.

When the military adopts a unit and calls it good enough for military use, I' ll consider it.

That's not an answer to my question. How is requiring smart guns limiting your right to own guns?

They are feasible, and with work can be made to be as flawless as the rounds you shoot -- which do in fact fail every so often, yet you still buy them.

They can exist, if we want them. What, or who, is preventing that?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-11-2017, 12:06 AM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(08-11-2017 12:18 PM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  
(08-11-2017 12:10 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  The shooter did not use a "military grade weapon". He used a Ruger AR-556 which is a variation on the AR-15 which is a semi-automatic civilian rifle, and not "military grade".
How do we define "military grade"?

Perhaps you should ask Dom, as he used the phrase.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-11-2017, 12:13 AM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(08-11-2017 12:42 PM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  That's not defence, that's reciprocal violence.

There's a bullshit answer for you if I ever saw one. Plead semantics all you want.

You, a military man, should know that defense often involves violence.

If someone starts whanging on you with their fists, are you not going to practice "reciprocal violence" to "defend" yourself? You gonna lay down and roll over?

Yeah, I didn't think so.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thumpalumpacus's post
09-11-2017, 12:18 AM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(08-11-2017 05:09 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
(08-11-2017 04:20 PM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  "I'll kill you more than you can kill me!" Logic?
Deflection and a strawman and really bloody ignorant in the face of multiple posts explaining exactly what I'm saying. There are morally and legally acceptable usages of force and the fact that it undermines your ridiculously biased narrative doesn't mean you can ignore the differences or ignore the fucking definitions of words.

Especially since he has availed himself of guns to kill those trying to kill him, from what I've read.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-11-2017, 01:45 AM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(08-11-2017 10:02 AM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  
(08-11-2017 09:39 AM)Gwaithmir Wrote:  > Explain how civilians are preventing the local and state police, ATF and FBI from enforcing existing gun control laws.

Easy enough. "That's not a priority for you right now."

> Citations needed.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: