BF2S Forums Official Mass Shooting & Suicide Bomber thread

When Macbeth was roleplaying a gun shopper, I'm pretty sure I brought up the 442 as a point of chat. If he was serious about it, I'd still recommend it for consideration. You were the one who brought up the 200 lb rapist and 120 lb woman scenario. My recommendation doesn't change here, with the caveat to anybody I'd recommend a gun to that they try before buy and go through training above and beyond requirements. I'm not really sure what you're trying to prove highlighting my post. I would no sooner recommend an AR-15 as a first line of home defense to a 120 lb person than a 220 lb person.

Nowhere am I disregarding rifles. You can definitely shoot a housebreaker just as dead. I brought up that they are lower on lists of home defense recommendations, and mentioned reasons why. If anyone's disregarding anything here, you're disregarding the necessity for training and drilling with them, claiming dubiously that it's a lower skill cap without explaining your reasons why. A small handgun is portable, pocketable, and lightweight. Do you open carry everywhere with your AR-15? How gauche.

Also pistols that you can't get a good proper grip on, due to short grips like a pocket revolver, require more practice to shoot accurately and properly control the recoil. A shouldered weapon like ar-15 or even a pistol caliber carbine is a far better option, granted if it has a stock and barrel length is under 16 inches you have to register it as an SBR(fuck you ATF) of course you could always give it a pi blah blah blah

It's not that difficult to shoot pistols. You're acting like it's a matter of superhuman finesse. It's not. How long of a hallway do you need to shoot down?

Civilians able to have superior weaponry than their nation's military is not unusual if you do some research

bro, you live in a nuclear superpower that spends as much on defence spending per year as 95% of all other nations' on earth's entire respective GDPs. stop with this 'arms parity' shit. a militiaman with an AR-15 is not going to do diddly squat against a national military who are determined to 'tyrannise' him.

Also again, ar-15 is not an assault rifle. It's a sporting rifle if you want classification.

again, you act like these classifications have some absolute and definitive quality, and aren't just terms shuffled around by people to suit their own interests. the people protesting loudly that it's a 'sporting rifle' are ... NRA and NRA-adjacent gun nuts. surprise surprise. what's the 'sport', pray tell? hunting hogs? exploding schoolchildren?

i'm sure all of those people who are loudly defending their right to own AR-15s are doing so because they have an avid sports pursuit. and it's not at all a cynical attempt to categorise the gun most responsible for mass shootings as an innocuous 'hobbyist' item.

anyhow, did you know that a banana is technically a berry but a strawberry is not? highly interesting stuff.

Hell there was a time in the 1800's when the military still used only muzzle loading guns while civilians could purchase and own high capacity magazine weapons.

technology advances fast; the law moves glacially slow. so what, your argument is that, for periods of time, people could own fancy new weapon tech before the law expressly forbade it? that is ... not a good argument. in fact, it's an argument for revising and updating the law now to ban a highly harmful trend in current-gen weapons technology. of course the law is continually trying to keep apace of new developments or close down loopholes. that's how fucking legislation and common law works, war man.

So we ban ar-15's then what? Shooters use mini-14's, pistols, illegally acquired weaponry, etc.. So we ban those then what?

no one is claiming that an AR ban would end school shootings or reduce handgun-related incidents. but a mass shooting with a low-capacity, low-calibre handgun is a lot less of a problem than a school shooter armed to the teeth with 'sporting equipment' (ahem). would 400 police officers and SWAT teams be afraid of a shooter with a pistol? i'd argue they'd probably be less fearful than of someone with an AR-15.

why do you have a problem with law enforcement specialists like SWAT teams having better weaponry than your average citizen? it seems like an obvious necessity to me in order to preserve peace and stability. again, it's absolutely unconstitutional to threaten or take up arms against said law enforcement, anyway. that is inciting revolt. it is treason. at a certain point in your poxed libertarian/gun nut thinking, you're going to have to admit that it's practical and expeditious to let law enforcement authorities have weapons and armour that are better than your average retail consumer. if school shooters can only legally access pistols, then that puts a crisis responder in full armour in a strong position, no?

"illegally acquired weaponry". how many school shooters are going to go to the pains to illegally acquire an AR-15? from whom? you are being facile. making these things illegal would dissuade a huge number of would-be shooters. you know ... that's exactly what happened during the last assault weapons ban! would it dissuade and make it impossible for everyone, in all circumstances: no. but it would be a huge deterrent. your average incel 4channer doesn't have any means to buy weapons from the black market.

Last edited by uziq (2022-07-21 02:36:47)

On-topic:

Yes it is much too easy for a mentally-ill teenager to buy an AR15 - which is an assault rifle - and unlimited clips magazines on a whim.

It should be made a lot harder, this would reduce mass-shootings.

There I said it.

Personally I'd make ownership of an actual assault rifle contingent on two years military service or five years with the reservists.
And you'd have to lock it up.

Dilbert_X wrote:

I think its time for a recap and reset before blancmage-brain uziq goes right down the rabbit hole.

it's 'blancmange'. didn't you used to live in france?

i can only hope you've retained that 6 months of fencing, 20 years later, better than you've kept your french.

also you using 'triggered' rhetoric and images is deeply cringe. i don't think anyone even says that anymore. very trump-bannon era.

if your line of argument is to continually make ad hominems about a person's supposed intelligence, it would serve you well to not be plainly idiotic, no?

you've swaggered into the thread and said several things that are simply erroneous.

you don't have to go deep into the abstruse scientific literature to realize that, yes, reaction times and reflexes can and do change. and that using a pointing device involves hand-eye coordination. these are very, very basic observations. and yet you sniggered and stated the exact opposite.

if you're going to insult someone's brain whilst making a typo, erm, okay. you do you mate!

reaction times can be trained and improved. it's everywhere in the literature on this subject.

it's amazing with what arrogance you dismiss actual scientific proof. in subjects you have no formal knowledge of whatsoever. shooting guns doesn't make you an expert on cognitive science, dilbert.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33419578/

Video games and surgical procedures share similar skills such as visuospatial abilities and hand-eye coordination; therefore, video games can be a valuable tool for surgical training amongst medical students.

[...]

A total of 575 participants from 16 studies were included. The most common surgical skills tested were laparoscopy (n = 283, from 8 studies) and robotic surgery (n = 199, from 5 studies). A history of gaming and video-game-based training were associated with improved metrics in robotic surgery and laparoscopy, respectively.

you're really not as smart or well-informed as you think you are. and the problem comes from the fact that you don't read anything.

Last edited by uziq (2022-07-21 03:40:28)

fencing is a highly formalized, balletic pursuit. it has nothing to do with street fighting, let alone fucking life-threatening encounters with a blade.

yes, i did competitive sports. believe it or not, you're not the only person who went to a school that had a sporting tradition and pursuits. i'm sure your parents have made you feel very, very special for getting your sporting colours in school, though.

and you still banging on about the 6 months of fencing you did at university, fucking 20+ years ago, is sad and pathetic.

and, again, you are emphasizing your 'physical prowess' here in a thread because ... what? i made a joke to desertfox that i used to like rifle-only deathmatch in a videogame. you are fucking mental hahahaha.

Last edited by uziq (2022-07-21 03:47:51)

what does it mean to say something is 'hard-wired'? the brain is plastic. reactions can be improved or worsened.

mental chronometry is like measurement science: it's more interested in experimental and methodological questions than practical applications.

of course there is a theoretical 'minimum' reaction time, which has a hard neurological limit specified by a person's own genetics and biology. but that's not what we're talking about, is it? an individual's own reaction times can improve and worsen within a subjective window.

and, you being old, and reaction times decaying with age, would suggest that a highly hand-eye coordinated 19 year old fortnite player is at their peak performance, whereas you are not. which is exactly what i said, in jest. you replying that 'reaction times are fixed' is total nonsense in that context. we aren't talking about mental chronometry, dilbert. we're talking about you being middle-aged and laughing at the idea that gen-z gamers might have sharper reactions than you.

Last edited by uziq (2022-07-21 04:01:27)

Greatest country in the world.

Schools literally falling apart.

Everyone thinks it's a mass shooter, anxieties soar.

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/07/17/us/i … index.html

Oh look, a shooter with ar style rifle was stopped by a guy with a glock. Guess we don't need to ban ar's and really shows how pathetic Uvalde cops were.

SuperJail Warden wrote:

Didn't he kill like 3 people in 15 seconds anyway?

Shooter would've done that with a pistol if ar-15's were banned. If Elijah wasn't there, there would've been more dead, possible everyone in the mall as police would've arrived too late.

Also Elijah reacted as soon as he heard gunfire and got 8/10 shots hitting the shooter at 40 fricken yards. I struggle to get a good grouping at 25 yards with a pistol.

War Man wrote:

SuperJail Warden wrote:

Didn't he kill like 3 people in 15 seconds anyway?

Shooter would've done that with a pistol if ar-15's were banned. If Elijah wasn't there, there would've been more dead, possible everyone in the mall as police would've arrived too late.

Also Elijah reacted as soon as he heard gunfire and got 8/10 shots hitting the shooter at 40 fricken yards. I struggle to get a good grouping at 25 yards with a pistol.

Er.

The legally armed bystander who ended up shooting the gunman was identified as Elisjsha Dicken, 22, of Seymour, Indiana. Dicken was able to neutralize the gunman within two minutes after the gunman had already fired 24 rounds from his rifle. Dicken fired 10 shots from his Glock handgun.

Weren't you also touting the killing superiority of an AR over any kind of pistol? "Easier to use" with "less training" or something like that?

It's so nice that we have dickheads in this country who can just grab an assault *ahem* "sporting" rifle and go absolutely ham on a crowd with large capacity magazines.

30-50 feral hogs.

You don't go to the mall for PTSD?