It's also useful for defense. Korean shop owners during the LA riots would disagree with you. The AR-15s (and shotguns and Mini-14s) they had saved their lives and livelihoods. All rifles (semi-automatic or otherwise) are responsible for almost no murders--less than 2% IIRC.
The idea of magazine restrictions is simply stupid. I do not load a full magazine, I load between five and ten to conserve ammunition when practicing. I did not have any problem today engaging multiple targets in rapid succession all the while on the move changing out empty magazines. These ignorant control advocates forget common sense, when reloading a magazine is a simple task. They certainly lack the skills to recognize this, but I would think they would have better imagination.
spot on! It takes time to load a magazine, unless you have an auto-loader. I've seen them for my 10/22, but priced strong, to pricey for me. So I load my 25 rd mags by hand...and it still takes a few minutes. For me, since it takes time to fill on up, I am stingy with my ammo. I try to make every round count. Add to the fact that Maobama's Raiders are still soaking up the open market for bullets, makes me even more careful with how much I use.
ArmaLite showed a video or something on one of those NRA sponsored gun nut websites about the fallacy of mag. capacity restrictions. I didn't watch it, but I gather that they demonstrated that a guy who is reasonably familiar with his gun can basically deliver the same rate of effective fire, regardless of mag. capacity. I prefer the factory 10 round mags for my 10/.22's. I used to hunt jack rabbits, 20 years ago, and I knew some good places. Time and time again, I found that when I happened upon a good little flurry of shooting, I'd normally burn only 6 to 8 rounds. I carried only 2 10 round mags. After shooting, and while I was back to looking, I'd swap to the fresh mag, and reload the other. Strangely enough, when I upgraded to .223 for better range, I went to a bolt gun. Now that I've further upgraded to an AR, I don't hunt anymore!
maybe YOU cant hit anything faster than 2 seconds per shot, but EYE surely can. In fact, I can hit 4 people per second, and I practice being faster every chance that I get, too. We value the AR's ability to make its skilled owner able to stop LOTS of inferior fighters. If you don't like it, that's tough. You'd better bring LOTS of inferior fighters to help you when you come TRY to take our AR's. That's a promise, pard.
what's the point, anyway? Being without a pistol grip just hurts your speed of handling and repeat shots.
super deadly??? a semi-auto is more deadly if it is an AR 15? More deadly than a 10/22 or a Remington .22 semi-auto? .45 ca. pistol? 9 mm handgun is less super deadly? I thought you knew all about guns. It isn't the gun, it is the mind behind the gun......
no, he's dictating according to what HE need. Your actual needs are irrelevant to his diagnosis - - - Updated - - - no. He speaks the truth.
sure it does...a 25 rd .22 clip can be most deadly in the hands of a trained shooter. How many bullets does it take to stop an intruder? It doesn't matter...it generally only takes one for effect and one to drive the point home
most shots in combat miss the man entirely, most hits are poor hits, and even good hits with powerful loads often fail. You can easily need 10 rds to defend yourself, against EACH attacker, especially if all you have is a feeble .22lr.
And now it's back to the ages old stopping power argument. Ron says that a gun owner would know one thing and another. I wish that were true. There's a huge amount of misinformation and urban myth floating around, and most gun owners don't have access to anything but public ranges with paper targets to test any of it. In the case of a lot of these guys, it's maybe better that they don't know, because then they'd be even more dangerous. St.James says it doesn't matter much what you get hit with, and a 10/.22 is quite lethal. Consider that the density of the lead in that little 40 gr. bullet is the same in relation to flesh as it is with any other lead projectile. Impact velocity is generally around 1,200 fps, so destruction in the bullet path will be very similar to any other bullet, but in a smaller area. If the bullet hits the central nervous system, it makes little difference. If it doesn't, the effect is very similar, whether it's a .22LR or a .357 Mag. There's a story floating around about a cop who had to hit his bad guy 16 times with a .45 ACP before the fight was over. He switched to carrying 135 rounds in 9mm after that, believing that the thing that finally stopped the bad guy was that he bled out. There's another story about an old guy in a wheel chair who hit his attacker with one round of .22LR in the sternum, and killed him. You don't want to get hit with anything! In my own informal testing, I found that a fast "double tap" with .22LR produced a wound channel in wet newspaper that closely resembled that of a 124 gr. 9mm JHP. I just don't want to get into what bullet choices make the difference with .223. I've done a lot of testing, and come to some conclusions, but on a public forum, I don't want to educate the wrong people.
the cop certainly WOULD say that, if he knew jack squat about guns. the .22lr pokes a little hole in you (maybe, if it doesn't hit something else first, and if it hits at close range and at a nearly 90 degree angle, otherwise, it's stopped or deflected quite easily. A good 223 softpoint, tho, blows pieces of you out on the ground, thru the 1" wide hole it tore in you. Inside your chest or gut, it destroys an area about as wide as a softball, 7-9" deep. If it pierces both lungs, side to side, as when you shoot a deer, it turns both lungs into "scambled eggs" sort of mess. If it hits the heart, it shreds it, same for liver, or spleen or kidney. The very high velocity impact (at ranges under 200m or so) and the rapid, expansion/fragmentation of the 223 bullet causes the Mach II, hydrostatic shock phenomenon, where the temporary gas cavity destroys fragile vital organs that the bullet never actually touches, or at least, does so for a 2-4" wider path than the actual permanent cavity torn by the bullet. when you shoot something likke a rabbit with a 223 sp, the rabbit is turned inside out, you'll see more guts than fur, I am NOT kidding! A mere .22lr does nothing of the kind.
and the high velocity "stinger" .22lr (from a rifle barrel) truly aint much different, effect wise, but that is NOT true of a 223 sp. they are world's apart in effect, due to the 2500+ fps (depending upon range to target) impact velocity of the 223. When you hit a coyote or feral dog with a .45 jhp, it howls and runs off, 50ft/50 yds, before bleeding out. Hit it with a 223 sp, up close, tho, and it will be SLAMMED to the ground and be unable to get up. Worlds of difference, a 223 rifle SOFTPOINT hit and a .22lr rifle hit (or typical centerfire handgun hit) Anyone who claims differently is ignorant of the facts, and I can prove it, any time at all.
no problem with that, but a 22lr can do enough damage to stop a man in the right place. With a 10 rd mag......... you can spend less money than a .223. My fav is a 12 ga. slug at thirty feet.....Lots of different ways to use guns, it depends on your training. A .22 (I use hollow point mags) catches the side of the sternum, it can go into heart or lungs, two or three in the same place. One in the intestines, septic, but one in the ass is only sore. Plus, there are so many more .22 out there than most anything else. Cops will tell you, the most favored gun in murders is the .22. I carry different for ccw and I've got my other tools, but my fav is my Ruger 10/22 magnum.
all cops are balistic experts??? the .223 is a military round, designed to tumble upon impact with a human being, so as to cause maximum damage.
My firearms are defensive, not offensive. I guess that's what bothers me the most. My weapons are called deadly and dangerous, but no one can prove my weapons or myself have ever violated one law. Not once. And neither of us have violated anyone else's Rights in any way shape or form. Forcing someone based on a maybe "what if's" to surrender a Right is unethical and immoral. It is also unlawful. We have given enough ground. And once they get done with us, IF they get done, you'll be next on their list.
no, the 223 was NOT "designed to tumble". That's just Internet bs. SOMETIMES it does, but if it were a design intent, it fails way too often to have been accepted. Especially the steel capped stuff, standard since 1986 or so. 22 mag aint much, from a pistol, about like a 380, and you can't carry a rifle around, (much) From a pistol, a .22lr is very marginal about whether it will pierce a heavy coat, the sternum and still be lethal. You are HOPING that you get the time for lots of hits. A .22 magnum RIFLE has less power (350 ft lbs) than a hot 100 gr or 90 gr jhp in a 5" barreled 9mm (over 400 ft lbs). Most shots in combat miss the man completely, and most hits are poor hits. That is a fact. So "thinking" that you are going to hit the brain with 1-2 shots is almost completely bs, and that's the only place that makes the .22lr anything like effective instantly. The 223 sp to the chest IS effective instantly, 98+x out of 100 hits, at ranges under 200 yds, where the sp still expands violently.
I can't quite agree with you here. A round from a 223 or 556 not having the proper twist rate to bullet weight can have a tumbling effect although that would be silly to design into a weapon because accuracy will suffer greatly. A round designed to tumble after striking a human that's a stretch....depending on what it strikes all bullets can tumble after impact but designing one to do so...that bit of ballistic magic in my books. Maximum damage is always created by three major principles...Bullet placement, bullet placement, and bullet placement.
