A challenge to the anti-gun crowd here. - part deux

USFREEDOM911 said:
You didn't watch the video or at least the part about someone trying to rush the shooter, while reloading, did you. :palm:
Click to expand...

Help me out: at what point in the video does someone rush the marksmen? I skimmed through it and didn’t see someone rushing the shooter.
 
JPF said:
Help me out: at what point in the video does someone rush the marksmen? I skimmed through it and didn’t see someone rushing the shooter.
Click to expand...

Really, you skimmed through it and couldn't find.
NO SHIT DUMBASS, when you made the CHOICE not to WATCH it.

Here, let me lead you by the hand:

Go to approximately the 9:38 mark and educate yourself; but it shows two separate examples, so you might want to get comfortable.

GEE, WHAT A DUMBASS YOU ARE.

:facepalm:
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Really, you skimmed through it and couldn't find.
NO SHIT DUMBASS, when you made the CHOICE not to WATCH it.

Here, let me lead you by the hand:

Go to approximately the 9:38 mark and educate yourself; but it shows two separate examples, so you might want to get comfortable.

GEE, WHAT A DUMBASS YOU ARE.

:facepalm:
Click to expand...

Several misconceptions in the video.

First thank you for directing me to the proper sequence. In the video the guy in the Sheriff’s uniform states the non shooter got 8 feet of so during the reload. This is enough time to leave many rooms.

Secondly, the marksman was standing still and was not under any stress such as someone returning fire, bedlam of an active shooter scenario, had the magazine at the ready, and other favorable conditions. That would likely not be the case in a school full of screaming kids.

Lastly, the shooter did not have to re-acquire the target which is what may happen in real life.

Lots of misconceptions in the video.

Above all else is the fact that less shooting is better. It’s a self evident truth that some are not willing to accept
 
Last edited:
JPF said:
Several misconceptions in the video.

First thank you for directing me to the proper sequence. In the video the guy in the Sheriff’s uniform states the non shooter got 8 feet of so during the reload. This is enough time to leave many rooms.

Secondly, the marksman was standing still and was not under any stress such as someone returning fire, bedlam of an active shooter scenario, had the magazine at the ready, asking other favorable conditions. That would likely not be the case in a school full of screaming kids.

Lastly, the shooter did not have to read quite the target which is what may happen in real life.

Lots of misconceptions in the video.

Above all else is the fact that less shooting is better. It’s a self evident truth that some are not willing to accept
Click to expand...

1 - How about you begin actually looking at what was presented, before you decide your intelligent enough to comment on it.
2 - OH, really. Please tell me how many would be able to leave the room he's in?
3 - What makes you think that : a-anyone would be firing back, b-what bedlam are you suggesting, c-why wouldn't someone have another magazine at the ready, d-are you suggesting that teachers are going to wait and guess someone is reloading and then telling the children to run.
4 - "reading" what target?? From what I've heard, the shooter was either just firing in the direction of groups or walking through the room and picking off targets, as they tried to hide.

Lot's of misconceptions in your projection.

And none of you're or Jade's ASSumptions or ASSertions have provided any proof; because it's nothing but speculation and FEELS.

:truestory:
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
It's not a "theory" and the video completely destroys your assertion, regarding smaller magazines.

Now I know it's around 14 minutes in length; but that's a small price to pay, for seeing FACTS instead of assumptions. :D

Click to expand...

Looks like JPF has figured out that not only is Jade in error; but so is he and he's groaning over the realization. :good4u:
 
StoneByStone said:
All very good points. Though when I realized what I was talking with, I gave up trying to use logic.
Click to expand...

I don’t understand it either. Less shots being fired is better than more shots being fired. It seems pretty elementary.

The video that he keeps promoting is pretty ridiculous as well. Like the assailant in a scenario is going to be standing bolt upright, have a platform right there with a magazine exactly where they can reach it, at the ready…

Hey, anything is possible in these mass murder events I suppose but that is pretty ridiculous.
 
JPF said:
I don’t understand it either. Less shots being fired is better than more shots being fired. It seems pretty elementary.

The video that he keeps promoting is pretty ridiculous as well. Like the assailant in a scenario is going to be standing bolt upright, have a platform right there with a magazine exactly where they can reach it, at the ready…

Hey, anything is possible in these mass murder events I suppose but that is pretty ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Then provide PROOF that I'm incorrect.

By the way, PROOF isn't just you saying so.

:truestory:
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
1 - How about you begin actually looking at what was presented, before you decide your intelligent enough to comment on it.

2 - OH, really. Please tell me how many would be able to leave the room he's in?
3 - What makes you think that : a-anyone would be firing back, b-what bedlam are you suggesting, c-why wouldn't someone have another magazine at the ready, d-are you suggesting that teachers are going to wait and guess someone is reloading and then telling the children to run.
4 - "reading" what target?? From what I've heard, the shooter was either just firing in the direction of groups or walking through the room and picking off targets, as they tried to hide.

Lot's of misconceptions in your projection.

And none of you're or Jade's ASSumptions or ASSertions have provided any proof; because it's nothing but speculation and FEELS.

:truestory:
Click to expand...

1. I did. thanks again for the directions to the time one would get during a reload.
2. Nobody knows. A standard bedroom is about 10 feet though as is a hallway; depends on where the shooting is taking place. Your video proves that a re-load under optimal conditions gives someone time to clear a bedroom or a hallway etc...
3. A)armed response may or may not happen but police would definitely be en-route. B). Kids screaming, blood flowing, fire alarms going off, etc... C). I'm sure they would, sitting on a platform directly in front of them? Likely not. D). I'm suggesting that less bullets flying at you is better than more bullets flying at you.
4. Auto correct got me on that one: I meant Re-acquiring the target. A shooter's motives could be anything. Harris and Kleibold were targeting bullies as I recall.

The video makes assumptions about charging the shooter. I'd be running in the other direction myself. The shooter in your video is not under any stress, any interference, any obstacles, etc... That likely wouldn't happen in real life.

Lots of misconceptions in the video.

As for proof; somethings are beyond having to be proven.... If you are being shot at, less bullets coming your way is better than fewer bullets coming your way. If you're waiting for proof of the self-evident fact...make yourself comfortable and it may dawn on you some day.
 
JPF said:
1. I did. thanks again for the directions to the time one would get during a reload.
2. Nobody knows. A standard bedroom is about 10 feet though as is a hallway; depends on where the shooting is taking place. Your video proves that a re-load under optimal conditions gives someone time to clear a bedroom or a hallway etc...
3. A)armed response may or may not happen but police would definitely be en-route. B). Kids screaming, blood flowing, fire alarms going off, etc... C). I'm sure they would, sitting on a platform directly in front of them? Likely not. D). I'm suggesting that less bullets flying at you is better than more bullets flying at you.
4. Auto correct got me on that one: I meant Re-acquiring the target. A shooter's motives could be anything. Harris and Kleibold were targeting bullies as I recall.

The video makes assumptions about charging the shooter. I'd be running in the other direction myself. The shooter in your video is not under any stress, any interference, any obstacles, etc... That likely wouldn't happen in real life.

Lots of misconceptions in the video.

As for proof; somethings are beyond having to be proven.... If you are being shot at, less bullets coming your way is better than fewer bullets coming your way. If you're waiting for proof of the self-evident fact...make yourself comfortable and it may dawn on you some day.
Click to expand...

2 - An opinion is not proof and is just an ASSumption; but you're free to present some proof.

3 - But it isn't less bullets "flying" and haven't you seem magazine holders, where they can be easily accessed??

4 - Except for a shooter that walked through the school room and targeted specific individuals, please show that other mass shootings involved the shooter "re-acquiring the target".

What makes you thing running away would save you from being shot in the back??

I provided proof, via the video, and you're free to find a video or first hand information that refutes the one I've provided.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
2 - An opinion is not proof and is just an ASSumption; but you're free to present some proof.

3 - But it isn't less bullets "flying" and haven't you seem magazine holders, where they can be easily accessed??

4 - Except for a shooter that walked through the school room and targeted specific individuals, please show that other mass shootings involved the shooter "re-acquiring the target".

What makes you thing running away would save you from being shot in the back??

I provided proof, via the video, and you're free to find a video or first hand information that refutes the one I've provided.
Click to expand...

While reloading, bullets are not flying. Your video doesn't prove it (such proof is not needed) but it does confirm the self-evident fact.

What your video does bring up is that it gives you 8 feet to cover during the re-load, time to get out of a room, out of a hallway, or to other cover etc...

A cherry picked video showing marksmen who know what they will be asked to do (Lord knows how many rehearsals) is cute but far from a real life scenario.

What does remain a mystery is that given the self-evident fact of fewer bullets flying at innocent people, why are you resisting small mag/clip sizes. Just a question.
 
JPF said:
While reloading, bullets are not flying. Your video doesn't prove it (such proof is not needed) but it does confirm the self-evident fact.

What your video does bring up is that it gives you 8 feet to cover during the re-load, time to get out of a room, out of a hallway, or to other cover etc...

A cherry picked video showing marksmen who know what they will be asked to do (Lord knows how many rehearsals) is cute but far from a real life scenario.

What does remain a mystery is that given the self-evident fact of fewer bullets flying at innocent people, why are you resisting small mag/clip sizes. Just a question.
Click to expand...

1 - It most certainly does show that bullets aren't flying, while a magazine is being changed, unless you can point out the time you're referring to.

2 - How do you feel they intend to ''get out" or reach cover where they can't be shot??

3 - They were the same amount, regardless of how many magazines were used or did you "skim" that part also?

4 - Because the video shows that banning larger magazines, does nothing to protect people from being shot.

I'm willing to view any evidence you may find, that refutes the video.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
1 - It most certainly does show that bullets aren't flying, while a magazine is being changed, unless you can point out the time you're referring to.

2 - How do you feel they intend to ''get out" or reach cover where they can't be shot??

3 - They were the same amount, regardless of how many magazines were used or did you "skim" that part also?

4 - Because the video shows that banning larger magazines, does nothing to protect people from being shot.

I'm willing to view any evidence you may find, that refutes the video.
Click to expand...

4-FALSE. If bullets are not being fired, that means nobody is getting shot. The more re-loads, the more time there are no bullets being fired.

Are you arguing that the guy is firing while he is reloading?
 
JPF said:
4-FALSE. If bullets are not being fired, that means nobody is getting shot. The more re-loads, the more time there are no bullets being fired.

5 - Are you arguing that the guy is firing while he is reloading?
Click to expand...

4 - Correct; but it doesn't mean that less bullets are fired, when numerous magazines are used.

5 - Was never part of my comments.
 
JPF said:
Thanks.
Click to expand...

I've been trying to get this across to others, since the beginning of this thread; but no one seemed to want to listen.

30 bullets are 30 bullets; whether they come from 1 - 30 round magazine, 2 - 15 round magazines, 3 - 10 round magazines, or 5 - 6 shot revolvers (as shown towards the end of the video).

By the way, the revolvers were faster then the semi-autos.

1.8 seconds faster then 1-30 round magazine / almost equal using 2-15 round magazines, and 3.65 seconds faster then 3-10 round magazines; with the trained shooter.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top