Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: America's Gun: The Rise of the AR-15 [View all]krispos42
(49,445 posts)30. So, to clarify...
...they should be really difficult to use, and have terrible recoil while simultaneously firing a bullet that is ineffective in killing somebody?
So, it should somehow fire a lightweight bullet at low velocity, then have some sort of solenoid-driven mechanism to punch the shooter in the shoulder?
Or maybe it should be double barreled, so each time you shot a lightweight bullet at low velocity, a second cartridge, a big old blank cartridge just crammed full of powder, should go off to make the gun kick really hard.
I'm continually amazed that people are surprised that gun technology has evolved beyond Elmer Fudd.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
90 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Who is "we", and where did "we" do this? I was buying my own ammo for my .22 when I was 14-15...
Ghost in the Machine
Apr 2013
#59
We already know AR15's kill large numbers of people very quickly and effectively.
tridim
Apr 2013
#16
I'd love for you to compare .223 Remington to .270 Winchester or .30-06 Springfield (deer calibers).
benEzra
Apr 2013
#15
A 270 with a hunting bullet will cause MUCH more devastation than standard .223 ammo
Pullo
Apr 2013
#34