diablopilot 2 #26 February 11, 2010 QuoteQuoteThe US military would be smart to prohibit access to this shotgun to only those inside of their trusted circles Waiting for the howls coming from those that think they should have access to ALL weapons available to the military. I'll give you a hot tip Paul. Blackwater, ain't military. Full Auto is a bit of a waste anyway.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #27 February 11, 2010 Quote Quote What exactly is there about this shotgun that scares you? What exactly is there about this shotgun that makes it so much more desirable for the military? It overpowers virtually everything else that comes before it. What exactly is your problem with keeping it out of the hands of criminals? How Paul? How exactly?---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #28 February 11, 2010 QuoteI'll give you a hot tip Paul. Blackwater, ain't military. I'll give you one in return . . . they changed their name to Xe. WTF makes you think I didn't know that?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #29 February 11, 2010 Quote Quote There are many flame throwers on this site however Say what you want. I did not know much about this firearm only that a friend told me about it, I looked it up and saw how potent it could be in a confined urban environment (especially when it is configured to fire rocket propelled grenades). But others have corrected me, others have told me that there are comparable firearms out there and even more potent ones (but the more potent ones are less maneuverable). This is one bad ass shotgun. I hope I never am standing on the wrong side of the barrel. I agree with you. It would be fun to play with just once but, even if I could own it I could never afford to shoot it like it is designed to be shot. (by the way, the comment I made was tongue in cheek and not aimed at you or anyone in particular) It is one bad ass shot gun and I too would never want to be on the business end of that thing"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #30 February 11, 2010 Quote Quote Quote If I had a rocket launcher ... There are many flame throwers on this site however Joke . . . too . . . easy. Must . . . control . . . self. I was expecting incoming so let'er fly!!"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #31 February 12, 2010 QuoteHow Paul? How exactly? Kinetic energy over time. Any more silly questions?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #32 February 12, 2010 Admit it, you don't like "scary looking" firearms.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #33 February 12, 2010 OMG, where did this hard thing come from? Honey?!?!We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #34 February 12, 2010 Quote Admit it, you don't like "scary looking" firearms. Dude, that's not just "scary LOOKING".quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #35 February 12, 2010 QuoteQuote Admit it, you don't like "scary looking" firearms. Dude, that's not just "scary LOOKING". It looks kinda cool. What is can do is a bit intimidating however."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #36 February 12, 2010 QuoteQuoteHow Paul? How exactly? Kinetic energy over time. there you go again with simplistic metrics. Comparing this KE/s value against others without any consideration for range will get you killed in a battle by the squad smart enough to engage in open turf rather than inside a crowded warehouse. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,772 #37 February 12, 2010 >Comparing this KE/s value against others without any consideration for >range will get you killed in a battle by the squad smart enough to engage in >open turf rather than inside a crowded warehouse. I can vouch for this. The last time Quade miscalculated his KE/s, he was killed in short order by an enemy squad once he left the warehouse. It's an embarrassing mistake, no doubt about it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #38 February 12, 2010 Quote I can vouch for this. The last time Quade miscalculated his KE/s, he was killed in short order by an enemy squad once he left the warehouse. It's an embarrassing mistake, no doubt about it. But he didn't learn his lesson, did he!? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #39 February 12, 2010 QuoteWaiting for the howls coming from those that think they should have access to ALL weapons available to the military. Indeed! Why that greedy corrupt government does not allow me to own a bazooka for self-defense from those ugly military robots they develop? It is of course the part of their strategy - so all your guns gonna be all useless against government invasion. And we all know what happens next - those CRIMINALS will steal those robots (you know, they are criminals, they steal everything) and hack them to commit murders, robberies and rapes - making a honest gun owner completely defenseless against them! Also it would be fun visiting that place where open-carry nuts crowd gets together while carrying a nice bazooka. Maybe some of them would immediately get an idea that just maybe open carry is not really a good idea.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1969912 0 #40 February 12, 2010 It should be as easy (law-wise) to purchase/own as a single-shot .22 rifle. "Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ." -NickDG Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 422 #41 February 12, 2010 Too smart by half Quade... too smart by half Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #42 February 12, 2010 QuoteQuoteWaiting for the howls coming from those that think they should have access to ALL weapons available to the military. Indeed! Why that greedy corrupt government does not allow me to own a bazooka for self-defense from those ugly military robots they develop? It is of course the part of their strategy - so all your guns gonna be all useless against government invasion. And we all know what happens next - those CRIMINALS will steal those robots (you know, they are criminals, they steal everything) and hack them to commit murders, robberies and rapes - making a honest gun owner completely defenseless against them! Also it would be fun visiting that place where open-carry nuts crowd gets together while carrying a nice bazooka. Maybe some of them would immediately get an idea that just maybe open carry is not really a good idea. dammit george!! why do you have to turn every thread into a gun thread!! Hell! this started out as a thread about a shotg... oh. yeah... move along. nothing to see here.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #43 February 12, 2010 Quote dammit george!! why do you have to turn every thread into a gun thread!! Hell! this started out as a thread about a shotg... oh. yeah... Maybe he does not know the difference. Maybe he calls a rifle a gun? I know when I was in the Reserve Forces my drill sergeant would shit down my throat if I called my rifle a gun. That is why they conditioned me to call it a weapon. But now I must re-program myself since the anti's freak out at the word weapon. So I will call this most bodacious (not your grandfather's) shotgun a firearm. Oh screw it ... it is a sick weapon. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #44 February 12, 2010 QuoteAlso it would be fun visiting that place where open-carry nuts crowd gets together while carrying a nice bazooka. Maybe some of them would immediately get an idea that just maybe open carry is not really a good idea. So you have a fantasy of blowing up a bunch of gun carry folks with a bazooka? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ferrisssavior 0 #45 February 12, 2010 QuoteQuoteAlso it would be fun visiting that place where open-carry nuts crowd gets together while carrying a nice bazooka. Maybe some of them would immediately get an idea that just maybe open carry is not really a good idea. So you have a fantasy of blowing up a bunch of gun carry folks with a bazooka? That's just unintelligent. So what if someone wants to open carry, if it is in their lawful capacity to do so that is. By limiting the supply of legally owned guns, you reduce and possible remove the ability to defend oneself from criminals, who will get guns anyway. And if they can't get guns they will resort to other methods of carrying out their plans. Take for example the amount of violent crimes in the UK. You can't buy a gun in the UK, and their "violent" crimes per capita is higher than the United States. I say "violent" because obviously there are different definitions of violent and different acts may be considered violent in one country and in the other, not. Read this, sure it uses old data, but its worth it. http://www.kc3.com/CCDW_Stats/fla_model.htm I'm actually taking a look right now; and in the whole state a Florida, which was the first, widely publicized, shall issue state, has a lower violent crime rate per 100,000 inhabitants by more than half of that of the District of Columbia. Florida has a rate of 688.8 violent crimes per 100,000 inhabitants and the District of Columbia has a rate of 1,437.7 per 100,000 inhabitants. That's weird that Florida's violent crime rate is less than half of that of DC's and.. oh man, isn't this a coincidence, the District of Columbia will not issue a concealed carry permit. I mean, almost all of us crazies down in Florida are allowed to own, and.. dare I say it.. carry guns, when legal to do so, and we aren't shooting each other in the faces left and right. It's because when someone is armed and is legally concealed carrying that weapon they are more responsible. http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2008/data/table_05.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #46 February 12, 2010 Quote So you have a fantasy of blowing up a bunch of gun carry folks with a bazooka? When are you finally going to stop putting words in someone's mouth?* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #47 February 12, 2010 Quote Take for example the amount of violent crimes in the UK. You can't buy a gun in the UK, and their "violent" crimes per capita is higher than the United States. The number of murders per capita in UK is lower than in US. The number of rapes per capita in UK is lower than in US. The number of assaults per capita in UK is lower than in US. Next time when you read the stats from NRA, please spend some time to actually verify them! Quote Florida has a rate of 688.8 violent crimes per 100,000 inhabitants and the District of Columbia has a rate of 1,437.7 per 100,000 inhabitants. That's weird that Florida's violent crime rate is less than half of that of DC's and.. oh man, isn't this a coincidence, the District of Columbia will not issue a concealed carry permit. This is weird because you compare crime rate in a city (with a population density 9,776.4/sq mi) with a crime rate in a state with a population density (338.4/sq mi). I'll even spend some time to show you why: a violent crime rate in TX is 540.5, but violent rate in Dallas is 1,069, and in Houston it is 1,132. FL has 711, but Jacksonville has 1,022. As you see, there is a significant difference in city rate versus state rate, and being a city DC must be compared with cities, not states. Obviously NRA won't tell you that as it does not fit into their propaganda. And yes, when you compare properly, i.e. city versus city, you will see that Detroit, Baltimore, New Orleans and Memphis have a higher crime rate than DC - but they do issue concealed carry permits, so the issue is obviously not there. Quote I mean, almost all of us crazies down in Florida are allowed to own, and.. dare I say it.. carry guns, when legal to do so, and we aren't shooting each other in the faces left and right. But you do shot each others more often than than CA with violent crime rate of 551.8, NY (441.6) and IL (542.9), with FL violent crime rate of 711.3. Quote It's because when someone is armed and is legally concealed carrying that weapon they are more responsible. At least not in FL.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #48 February 12, 2010 QuoteNext time when you read the stats from NRA, please spend some time to actually verify them! Maybe you should have done some verification yourself. Home office shows some 2.1 million violent crimes for 2008. Using the world bank population for the UK of 61.4 million, that works out to a violent crime rate of 3443/100k. The US violent crime rate for 2008 is 454/100k. You were saying?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #49 February 12, 2010 Funny, I watched that episode only yesterday. A great bit of kit but it really has no place in the civillian world, I agree this should be a restricted firearm and just as importantly some of the ammo shown on that episode should also be not availble to civvies.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #50 February 12, 2010 QuoteQuoteWhat exactly is there about this shotgun that makes it so much more desirable for the military? It overpowers virtually everything else that comes before it. Not really. At close range it's great, but no shotgun is of any real use beyond about 100yds. That's just the nature of the cartridge. One skilled soldier with a .30cal rifle (M14) could easily take out a large group armed with these shotguns, as long as he could engage them beyond 100yds. Mag capacity and rate of fire are much greater than for other shotguns, but (especially for military situations) shotguns are of limited utility. What they are good for, they are great for, but they aren't good in a lot of places. Actually this weapon has a round that can reachout to 175YardsWhen an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites