http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2013/01/14/huh-lookit-what-was-strapped-to-this-guys-leg-at-the-gun-control-rally-yesterday Comments On: Huh, Lookit What Was Strapped To This Guy's Leg At The Gun Control Rally Yesterday by Kelly O en-us Copyright 2013 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Thu, 23 May 2013 00:00:01 -0700 Thu, 23 May 2013 17:30:00 -0700 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Posted by clashfan]]> Wed, 16 Jan 2013 20:26:16 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Hawke]]> Wed, 16 Jan 2013 19:48:06 -0800 The Stranger
The civilian AR-15 functions EXACTLY like the military M-16 does in "select fire" semi-automatic mode.

In both, the rifle fires one bullet for each trigger pull.

The AR-15 will fire AS fast as you can pull the trigger. As an assault rifle, it it has a high "cyclic rate of fire". It will fire about 800 rounds per minute. Semiautomatic pistols and hunting rifles have a lower cyclic rate of fire and shoot far fewer rounds per minute.

This video shows how fast. Mind you, this is a legal, semi-auto AR-15. One bullet per trigger pull. Who needs full automatic fire?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-qXR42D8…

They both fire a round that is more likely to kill you, because it is the product of extensive research into creating a bullet designed to inflict maximum injury.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.56%C3%974…

"It is derived from, but not identical to, the .223 Remington cartridge (used by the AR-15). When the bullet impacts at high velocity and yaws[3] in tissue, fragmentation creates a rapid transfer of energy which can result in dramatic wounding effects.[4][5][6]"

These typically are not used for hunting, if for no other reason than that they cause too much damage to the game animal being hunted.


Posted by TheBadSeed131313]]> Wed, 16 Jan 2013 16:09:20 -0800 The Stranger Posted by TheBadSeed131313]]> Wed, 16 Jan 2013 15:16:44 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Gnot]]> Tue, 15 Jan 2013 23:04:18 -0800 The Stranger Posted by HOT PUSSY]]> Tue, 15 Jan 2013 14:22:28 -0800 The Stranger BUT, there is something of the energy of the flasher in this kind of thing.
"It's the look in your eyes when you realize my gun is showing."

Also, the self-conscious military wannabe wankage of the carelessly slung thigh holster. "You guys! Look at how inured I am of this thing! I can't even be bothered to adjust it so it rides right! You guys!"

The pistol-packing samurai from Yojimbo comes to mind.
Posted by aureolaborealis]]> Tue, 15 Jan 2013 13:41:35 -0800 The Stranger
It might scare some people, but it's legal nonetheless. Except, this guy has a constitutional right to have a gun and there is no right-to-drive part of the Bill of Rights. So it's actually even less newsworthy. Those who fear the very sight of a gun (which is safely and legally being carried, even) will never be able to effectively argue with people who oppose any and all legislation of them.

Posted by mtnlion]]> Tue, 15 Jan 2013 13:23:54 -0800 The Stranger
@46: He's open carrying. You don't need a concealed carry license when you open carry (unless loaded in a vehicle, or in a certain class of building - see RCW 9.41.300). There's nothing that says having a concealed carry license means you must conceal, any more than having a driver's license means you may not bicycle anywhere.
Posted by Tawnos]]> Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:49:34 -0800 The Stranger
I'm trying to understand why fnarf and Cthulhu think that some semi-automatic rifles are more dangerous than other semi-automatic rifles.

Fully-automatic rifles don't enter into the equation.
Posted by GermanSausage]]> Tue, 15 Jan 2013 11:17:19 -0800 The Stranger Posted by treehugger]]> Tue, 15 Jan 2013 11:13:19 -0800 The Stranger Posted by dirac]]> Tue, 15 Jan 2013 10:56:12 -0800 The Stranger Posted by hifiandrew]]> Tue, 15 Jan 2013 09:34:03 -0800 The Stranger Posted by WanderingSoul]]> Tue, 15 Jan 2013 08:11:36 -0800 The Stranger
Feeling bad? Maybe you need a bigger gun.
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn]]> Tue, 15 Jan 2013 08:04:00 -0800 The Stranger
Also seems like poor access to something you think you may need in a heartbeat, especially for a right handed shooter.

@38: Dude, you should stop to recognize irony/a joke before you call someone dumb. Because nothing makes you look dumb like a huge whoooooosh.
Posted by Theodore Gorath]]> Tue, 15 Jan 2013 06:00:48 -0800 The Stranger Posted by OOF POOF]]> Tue, 15 Jan 2013 05:55:22 -0800 The Stranger Posted by S T]]> Tue, 15 Jan 2013 01:22:34 -0800 The Stranger Posted by madcap]]> Tue, 15 Jan 2013 01:01:39 -0800 The Stranger
No but really, semi-automatic rifles are necessary to protect your home from the jack-booted government thugs. You know, those guys with the fully-automatic guns, better logistics, teams, and drones (cause that sort of resistance worked so well for bin Laden). Or in the wind-torn afterscape, to fend of the roving rape bandits who won't think to pack any firearms.

But really, it's so your kid or neighbor can steal your gun and kill a bunch of people, perhaps including yourself.
Posted by madcap]]> Tue, 15 Jan 2013 00:55:05 -0800 The Stranger Hahahahahahahahaha!
Posted by Totalpukoid]]> Mon, 14 Jan 2013 23:23:28 -0800 The Stranger

Posted by jt]]> Mon, 14 Jan 2013 22:51:37 -0800 The Stranger
Did you really think they were the same thing?

"It makes no logical sense why you would care about the assault weapons ban unless you thought they were more deadly."

If I thought they were more deadly, I might support the ban. I don't see why they're more deadly. So the whole idea strikes me as stupid and misguided as banning video games. Do you think they're more deadly? I'd love to hear why.
Posted by GermanSausage]]> Mon, 14 Jan 2013 22:31:51 -0800 The Stranger
I've seen your rhetoric and immature engagement before; you're not worth my time. That post just further reinforces what I already have found through examination of previous evidence on record.

Sheesh, your posts make me feel like I'm talking to a Christian who claims abortion is murder and evolution is a deception of the devil
Posted by Tawnos]]> Mon, 14 Jan 2013 22:26:26 -0800 The Stranger
What does hunting have to do with the Second Amendment?

And why can't you go hunting with the functionally identical but cosmetically different rifle that you keep saying the assault weapons ban doesn't touch? Are you trying to scare the animals?

It makes no logical sense why you would care bout the assault weapons ban unless you believed, as the Army does, the banned weapons are more effective. More deadly. Hence the ban.

And why hasn't the sun set on freedom in the 9 states that ban or limit assault weapons in some way? Has any terrible thing happened in those 9 states? Or during the 10 years we had the assault weapons ban nation wide?
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn]]> Mon, 14 Jan 2013 21:58:58 -0800 The Stranger