The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0

[IKnowNothing]

Unfortunately it's true .

It's true, but irrelevant. It's a physics based red herring, and it's introduction to the firearms control debate is nothing but selfish petulance.

If there's to be a cynical debate on firearms policy stemming from this disgusting attack, the pro-gun side needs to get on board with two truths-

Australian gun control laws saved lives by limiting what those assholes had in their hands
Australian LE preparedness/ policy cost lives by limiting the effectiveness of response, giving the assholes more time

 

[Jarnhamar]

It's true, but irrelevant. It's a physics based red herring, and it's introduction to the firearms control debate is nothing but selfish petulance.

It won't be irrelevant when citizens shift focus and fight to ban your deadly military grade Remington 700 and 870. After all why do you need to hunt with guns that snipers and combat soldiers use?

Australian gun control laws saved lives by limiting what those assholes had in their hands

Maybe. High caliber rifles and shotguns can do some serious damage.
Imagine the carnage if these assholes would have "opened fire" with 2 haul trucks to start.

Australian LE preparedness/ policy cost lives by limiting the effectiveness of response, giving the assholes more time

Probably yeah.

Lots of police are more akin to armed social workers than "warriors". I doubt the Australian people would go for every day police officers looking and acting like goons from tactical teams.

 

[IKnowNothing]

It won't be irrelevant when citizens shift focus and fight to ban your deadly military grade Remington 700 and 870. After all why do you need to hunt with guns that snipers and combat soldiers use?

Selfish, petulant, and remarkably disingenuous. Combat ignorance with insight, don't give it fuel.

This board has an active 20 page thread lamenting the failings of and arguing the minutiae of the effectiveness of the various upgrade paths of the C7/ C8 family and how its absolutely critical to get it right so our troops aren't disadvantaged, and I'm willing to bet some of the people posting here stung by OIC's spent a lot of time discussing and optimizing the their rigs for 3 gun comps, but once gun control is the topic lets go full stupid and say a gun is gun so lets dare them to ban em all.

Maybe.

75 shots in 5 minutes is what I've seen reported, and I've seen multiple clips of people running in clear sight and getting to safety as black pants worked the action feverishly to get 1-2 shots off.

High caliber rifles and shotguns can do some serious damage.

Sure they can. But again, we all know that Mauser's and Enfield's are no longer standard issue infantry weapons for good reason. We know that no amount of training is going to get a guy with a lever 45-70 and 12 ga sxs to the winner's circle in an open 3 gun match Rounds may be as lethal, or more so- but the weapons are less effective.

 

[Fabius]

Selfish, petulant, and remarkably disingenuous. Combat ignorance with insight, don't give it fuel.

This board has an active 20 page thread lamenting the failings of and arguing the minutiae of the effectiveness of the various upgrade paths of the C7/ C8 family and how its absolutely critical to get it right so our troops aren't disadvantaged, and I'm willing to bet some of the people posting here stung by OIC's spent a lot of time discussing and optimizing the their rigs for 3 gun comps, but once gun control is the topic lets go full stupid and say a gun is gun so lets dare them to ban em all.

75 shots in 5 minutes is what I've seen reported, and I've seen multiple clips of people running in clear sight and getting to safety as black pants worked the action feverishly to get 1-2 shots off.


Sure they can. But again, we all know that Mauser's and Enfield's are no longer standard issue infantry weapons for good reason. We know that no amount of training is going to get a guy with a lever 45-70 and 12 ga sxs to the winner's circle in an open 3 gun match Rounds may be as lethal, or more so- but the weapons are less effective.

If you think gun control, in any country but particularly the UK, Canada and Australia, is governed by reason and logic I have some ocean front property in Saskatchewan to sell you.

There is no logic, reason, consistency just emotional feelings and desires. Most of the prominent gun control advocates driving it forward are not ignorant, they are clear eyed and upfront in their beliefs. Canada’s certainly are. They don’t acknowledge logic, reason or consistency, they don’t believe firearms have any reason to be in private citizens hands, period. Doesn’t matter what the firearms calibre, rate of fire and action type are.
They have publicly on record stated that criminals are a lesser threat than societies legal gun owners are.

For various reasons across countries politicians have consistently privileged the gun control advocates perspective over logic, reason and consistency. I have little faith that insight will allow much success in western countries.

 

[IKnowNothing]

If you think gun control, in any country but particularly the UK, Canada and Australia, is governed by reason and logic I have some ocean front property in Saskatchewan to sell you.

There is no logic, reason, consistency just emotional feelings and desires. Most of the prominent gun control advocates driving it forward are not ignorant, they are clear eyed and upfront in their beliefs. Canada’s certainly are. They don’t acknowledge logic, reason or consistency, they don’t believe firearms have any reason to be in private citizens hands, period. Doesn’t matter what the firearms calibre, rate of fire and action type are.
They have publicly on record stated that criminals are a lesser threat than societies legal gun owners are.

For various reasons across countries politicians have consistently privileged the gun control advocates perspective over logic, reason and consistency. I have little faith that insight will allow much success in western countries.

All great reasons to effectively throw in the towel and hand them the win.

 

[Jarnhamar]

but once gun control is the topic lets go full stupid and say a gun is gun so lets dare them to ban em all.

Getting hyper fixated on banning magazine counts and action types misses the bigger picture. The advantages of sinister 30 round mags and dreadful semi-autos are easily offset with experience and confidence. One of these shooters looked very confident with the bolt-action style rifle.

I'm not in favor of banning all firearms. Just that until they (or we) do, people won't realize how much of a wasted effort it is. Or how vulnerable it makes them as citizens.

Sure they can. But again, we all know that Mauser's and Enfield's are no longer standard issue infantry weapons for good reason. We know that no amount of training is going to get a guy with a lever 45-70 and 12 ga sxs to the winner's circle in an open 3 gun match Rounds may be as lethal, or more so- but the weapons are less effective

If buddy with the lever 45-70 lever and 12ga is the only one with ammo and he's experienced with them no one is making it back to their cars.


What's the chances "there were signs" with this duo on their social media or daily life?

 

[IKnowNothing]

Getting hyper fixated on banning magazine counts and action types misses the bigger picture. The advantages of sinister 30 round mags and dreadful semi-autos are easily offset with experience and confidence. One of these shooters looked very confident with the bolt-action style rifle.

That's objectively nonsense. I can't believe I'm reading it on a military board.

 

[Jarnhamar]

That's objectively nonsense. I can't believe I'm reading it on a military board.

I'm biased because I can shoot a bolt rapidly and accurately. 870s too.

Explain what you find objectively nonsence.

 

[IKnowNothing]

I'm biased because I can shoot a bolt rapidly and accurately. 870s too.

Well then by all means lets cancel the modular assault rifle program in favour of the Savage Axis. All theoretical advantages can be offset with experience and confidence.

 

[Fabius]

All great reasons to effectively throw in the towel and hand them the win.

If you’re arguing about magazines or action types you are losing.
Gun control is in effect now driven by political extremism. It needs to be countered as such.

Decisions need to be inclusive in their making.
The rule of law must be adhered to.
Winner take all outcomes need to be avoided.
Education and critical thinking need to emphasized.
Misperceptions need to be countered.

Government and leaders in the western countries need to adhere and insist on the above not be those responsible for doing the exact opposite.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Well then by all means lets cancel the modular assault rifle program in favour of the Savage Axis. All theoretical advantages can be offset with experience and confidence.

How about instead of canceling the modular assault rifle program you explain what you find objectively nonsence.

 

[brihard]

Could the gun control tangent maybe get split and merged back to its proper thread and keep this one focused on the specific event, investigation etc?

 

[Fabius]

This board has an active 20 page thread lamenting the failings of and arguing the minutiae of the effectiveness of the various upgrade paths of the C7/ C8 family and how its absolutely critical to get it right so our troops aren't disadvantaged, and I'm willing to bet some of the people posting here stung by OIC's spent a lot of time discussing and optimizing the their rigs for 3 gun comps, but once gun control is the topic lets go full stupid and say a gun is gun so lets dare them to ban em all.

What upgrades and technology from the CMAR should be prohibited for civilians? The automatic capability has already been for decades.

The CMAR RoF is no higher than the C7 and in practical terms is no more than any semi automatic action type.

Is it the free float barrel that’s objectionable? Maybe the MLOCK attachment points?
Is it the adjustable stock? Maybe short barrels, although those decrease velocity compared to longer ones (generally)?

Those features are shared by numerous firearms of all calibres, actions, lengths and weights.

 

[IKnowNothing]

How about instead of canceling the modular assault rifle program you explain what you find objectively nonsence.

That "experience and confidence" can overcome known technical deficiency and basic physics.
Are claiming that you can take a .223 bolt gun with a 5 round capacity and put 50 hits down range (call it an equal mix of 50 / 75/ 100 yard) just as fast as you could with a semi with a 30 round boxes, assuming you had equal "experience and confidence" with each firearm? That a rifle section with said bolt .223's is on equal footing with one of comparable "experience and confidence" with semi-C8's?


@Fabius - the point isn't that any aspect of CMAR should be prohibited for civilians, its the absolute pretzel people will make of themselves to deny the existence of capability differences that they will argue about endlessly in other venues. I disagree with but understand your absolutist philosophical stance that capability is irrelevant to the debate- but that is very different than others erroneously stating that capability difference doesn't exist.

 

[Jarnhamar]

That "experience and confidence" can overcome known technical deficiency and basic physics.
Are claiming that you can take a .223 bolt gun with a 5 round capacity and put 50 hits down range (call it an equal mix of 50 / 75/ 100 yard) just as fast as you could with a semi with a 30 round boxes, assuming you had equal "experience and confidence" with each firearm?

So basically having a robot doing the shooting while laying down on a shooting range with a bolt action rifle in one and a semi-auto in the other? I'd guess the semi-auto will be faster.

Why is it some mass shootings with AR15s have a dozen fatalities and some have 3 or 4? Every situation is different.

Semi-autos with big magazines are easy to blast away on. Psychologically speaking it can cause people to be less accurate (sometimes with shooters who are terrible shots with a C7 we make them load and fire one round at a time).

Factor in variables such as a shooters experience, confidence level, training (read up why the military shoots man sized targets and not big circles), distance, weapon reliability (I've never had a stove pipe jam in my model 64 Winchester or Remington 700), and the advantages of a smile auto (and there are a bunch) can be reduced.

I can make some guesses why you don't want to hear it but those variables can mitigate some of the advantages of semi automatic military flavored rifles with large magazines.

How long does it take you to reload your shotgun?

I feel like your more okay with military style firearms being banned "because they're dangerous". I've seen how dangerous "hunting" guns can be, it's disingenuous to act otherwise. If you're going to ban military flavored firearms you might as well ban them all.

Also, a rifle section armed with C8s going up against a section at range with Rem 700s is in for a bad day.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Delete

 

[The Bread Guy]

Could the gun control tangent maybe get split and merged back to its proper thread and keep this one focused on the specific event, investigation etc?

Noted - please stand by for post moves to the "The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0" thread.

Army.ca Staff

 

[IKnowNothing]

So basically having a robot doing the shooting while laying down on a shooting range with a bolt action rifle one one and a semi-auto in the other? I'd guess the semi-auto will be faster.

Why is it some mass shootings with AR15s have a dozen fatalities and some have 3 or 4? Every situation is different.

Semi-autos with big magazines are easy to blast away on. Psychologically speaking it can cause people to be less accurate (sometimes with shooters who are terrible shots with a C7 we make them load and fire one round at a time).

Factor in variables such as a shooters experience, confidence level, training (read up why the military shoots man sized targets and not big circles), distance, weapon reliability (I've never had a stove pipe jam in my model 64 Winchester or Remington 700).
I can make some guesses why you don't want to hear it but those variables can mitigate some of the advantages of semi automatic military flavored rifles with large magazines.

How long does it take you to reload your shotgun?

I feel like your more okay with military style firearms being banned "because they're dangerous". I've seen how dangerous "hunting" guns can be, it's disingenuous to act otherwise.

No offense, but that's a lot of words to say "no".

Of the bold- all are held equal and in the control of the shooter. That's the bottom line, all else equal- a given person is going to be more effective with a better tool in their hands. That someone with decades of practice can be better with a bolt gun than someone that picked up a gun for the first time is with a semi is immaterial.

I'm more okay with it because of the above. There's a real functional difference in capability. Limiting what bad actors have access to can save lives, as it did in Bondi. With the firearms available in canada one can hunt, one can plink, one can CASS (or space CASS) one can shoot precision, skeet, trap. And no one is coming for those guns outside of few nuts that don't have broad support in the population, nuts that I would rather not have the support of petulant/ spiteful comments like the below to fuel their crusade.

.If you're going to ban military flavored firearms you might as well ban them all.

 

[OldSolduer]

The only solution is to ban all firearms and let citizens deal with what happens after that.

And the problem will go away? Except now the assholes who don't obey laws will have guns.....and we won't.

 

[Fabius]

I'm more okay with it because of the above. There's a real functional difference in capability. Limiting what bad actors have access to can save lives, as it did in Bondi. With the firearms available in canada one can hunt, one can plink, one can CASS (or space CASS) one can shoot precision, skeet, trap. And no one is coming for those guns outside of few nuts that don't have broad support in the population, nuts that I would rather not have the support of petulant/ spiteful comments like the below to fuel their crusade.

Canada has never made firearms laws or regulations in the last 40 years based off capability. The decisions were made on disinformation.