Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Multiple dead in TDKR showing

Sean Payton's Vicodin

By Sean Payton's Vicodin,
in Huddle Lounge

Recommended Posts

Cat Newbie

Cat

Posted
Posted

I really fail to see how the type of weapon has any bearing on the situation.

So he couldn't have killed a dozen people with semiauto handguns and a shotgun?

C'mon.

Have you ever shot an AR-15? There is a difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kurb Newbie

Kurb

Posted
Posted

He killed 12 and injured 60ish. Equal results wouldn't have happened with a shotgun

Incorrect in just about every way.

You can actually hurt more people with a shotgun, much faster.

Short Barrel would give you a much wider spray.

Not as lethal at a distance however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Inimicus Mentor

Inimicus

Posted
Posted

He killed 12 and injured 60ish. Equal results wouldn't have happened with a shotgun

My Glock came with 2 clips at 10 rnds ea

My Winchester model 12 holds 6 shells

In thinking that in a dark, crowded, panicked movie theater it wouldn't take all that much skill to come up with those same numbers. Its certainly conceivable to get that body count simply by adding my 38+P Revolver. Throw in a second semi-auto handgun with a second clip and your over the top and not even significantly encumbered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cat Newbie

Cat

Posted
Posted

Incorrect in just about every way.

You can actually hurt more people with a shotgun, much faster.

Short Barrel would give you a much wider spray.

Not as lethal at a distance however.

Disagree. I've shot both. And while the spray on a shot gun is wide, you have to be close and the fire rate is much slower. I've shot an AR-15. I'm not a very experienced shooter and could do some SERIOUS damage quick with it.

With a room full of people you could just go to town.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kurb Newbie

Kurb

Posted
Posted

Um yes.

Yeah that's not going to happen.

I know its scary out there folks, but crazy people exist and they do awful things.

This dude would have hurt people with pipebombs or something similar.

You can't legislate bad things away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cat Newbie

Cat

Posted
Posted

Yeah that's not going to happen.

I know its scary out there folks, but crazy people exist and they do awful things.

This dude would have hurt people with pipebombs or something similar.

You can't legislate bad things away.

Oh I know it wont. Because the NRA rules and people are dumbass who love their guns and ammo.

Lets keep buying ammo on the same level as buying chewing gum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kurb Newbie

Kurb

Posted
Posted

Disagree. I've shot both. And while the spray on a shot gun is wide, you have to be close and the fire rate is much slower. I've shot an AR-15. I'm not a very experienced shooter and could do some SERIOUS damage quick with it.

With a room full of people you could just go to town.

Again, incorrect.

Maybe shoot one of these http://www.gunsamerica.com/953044791/Guns/Shotguns/Saiga-Shotguns/Shotguns/SAIGA_RAPTOR_12GA_TACTICAL_SHOTGUN_PACKAG.htm

and get back to me.

A semi-auto assault rifle is actually a pretty horrible choice for shooting into a room of people. It you are looking to inflict as much damage as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kurb Newbie

Kurb

Posted
Posted

Oh I know it wont. Because the NRA rules and people are dumbass who love their guns and ammo.

Lets keep buying ammo on the same level as buying chewing gum.

Pretty sure you need to be 18 to purchase ammo.

Haven't gotten any in awhile tho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • LinvilleGorge
      Mini camp tweets

      By LinvilleGorge · Posted

      Dude... you're just all over the place. You're the one who said T-Mac is better right now than Chark was at his best.
    • tukafan21
      Mini camp tweets

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      When I say "average NFL WR", for me, that's comparing him to all WRs in the league during that season/span of time.  He was of course better than those #4-6 WR's that can't even get on the field, but talent/ability wise, he probably wasn't any better than a #3 WR for most NFL teams, he just happened to be on one of the teams in 2019 with even worse WR's so he put up solid stats for the season. Here's more or less how I'm looking at it. Take T-Mac right now and Chark at his best, put them on every NFL team at this very moment, and where would they fall on the depth chart come Week 1 (basically, the teams that don't put the rookies at #1 to "make them earn it in camp" don't count, it's projecting week 1 depth charts). T-Mac would be at worst the #2 WR on the majority of teams this season, (hell, he's likely our #1 at this very moment right now already), peak Chark would not.  Yes, T-Mac still has to prove himself at this level, but his current ability, even as a rookie who hasn't played a snap yet, would have him above Chark on any team's week 1 depth chart. Because again, you can't just fall back on "well Chark had a 1,000 yard season" and use that as the reason for having him above T-Mac.  As he didn't have that 1k yards because he was a beast, it was because he was the only halfway decent receiving option on a bad team that was always losing and passing the ball (the Jags had the 7th worst scoring differential that season).
    • LinvilleGorge
      BREAKING: Panthers interested in Justin Simmons

      By LinvilleGorge · Posted

      We clearly need to add a veteran stopgap at safety one way or the other.
×
×
  • Create New...