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
 

Travis_0004

(5,417 posts)
4. I would assume you can use both, depending on your target
Wed Jul 1, 2015, 11:01 AM
Jul 2015

It works well for suppressing fire if you have to, but its very easy to switch to single shot for a target far away.

If the military had somebody shooting at them from 300 yard, they are not going to give up and run away. They will do the best they can. They can still shoot one shot a second at 300 yards, and be accurate enough.

Or to put it another way. Older rifles, like the M14 were good up to 600 meters, but were heavy and could not carry as much ammo.

M16's were lighter, and still effective up to 300 meters.

Great rebuttal Ben DonP Jul 2015 #1
Great post! Hangingon Jul 2015 #2
Wait a minute! I smell a rat! Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #3
I would assume you can use both, depending on your target Travis_0004 Jul 2015 #4
The author of the OP you just fisked posted this a few months ago: friendly_iconoclast Jul 2015 #5
"In my case, you called me names, insulted my intelligence and integrity." pablo_marmol Jul 2015 #6
More guns than fingers? Ooooh. Sooo impressive. AtheistCrusader Jul 2015 #31
Another outstanding takedown, benEzra. pablo_marmol Jul 2015 #7
You are approximately five times more likely to win the lottery than be murdered by a .223 cal rifle the band leader Jul 2015 #8
It seems a response to this thread was posted Somewhere Else... benEzra Jul 2015 #9
picking nits & bigger game jimmy the one Jul 2015 #10
Facts inconvenient to your thesis = "nitpicking". benEzra Jul 2015 #11
+1. Once again, verifiable truth is shown to be superior to mere weight of verbiage friendly_iconoclast Jul 2015 #12
cavitation jimmy the one Jul 2015 #13
You are confusing cavitation with fragmentation. benEzra Jul 2015 #14
cavitation jimmy the one Jul 2015 #15
Thoughts... benEzra Jul 2015 #16
incredible super cavitation jimmy the one Jul 2015 #17
Given that we are talking about the least misused guns... benEzra Jul 2015 #18
the dancer undulates to the music jimmy the one Jul 2015 #19
Well, to get pedantic... benEzra Jul 2015 #21
pink floyd is wrong jimmy the one Jul 2015 #22
modification jimmy the one Jul 2015 #23
Then you should tell all the physicists working on supercavitating projectiles, blades, and foils benEzra Jul 2015 #24
What's the big deal? discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2015 #25
"A little learning is a dang'rous thing;... friendly_iconoclast Jul 2015 #27
This subthread gives me life. Brickbat Jul 2015 #28
enriched jimmy the one Jul 2015 #30
. Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #20
This is all the more hilarious if you know the origins of this image. AtheistCrusader Jul 2015 #33
I'm afraid I don't. Now I'm aching with curiosity. Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #34
Allow me AtheistCrusader Jul 2015 #35
Oh my. Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #36
Possibly the most expressive cat I've ever seen AtheistCrusader Jul 2015 #37
Um, no. AtheistCrusader Jul 2015 #32
As I'm sure you know HassleCat Jul 2015 #26
The posters were arguing for bans, not background checks. benEzra Jul 2015 #29
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»More scaremongering about...»Reply #4