14 Feb 2018 FL school shooting

[lather]

Thanks for the reply Brian. Many years ago I researched  ballistics when I was interested in hunting and was impressed with the  Winchester .270 but decided my Winchester 94 was the best choice for the dense jungles of the Bayou State. But I lost interest in hunting... and fishing and watersking and autocross as my interest in motorcycling increased.  It's easier to be good at just one thing.

[maxtog]

It may very well be underpowered compared to other hunting rifles, but we are not talking about sniper marksmanship here. The targets are in relatively close quarters and you are conveniently ignoring the 50 - 60 round high capacity magazines that wreak havoc in a cluster of panicked individuals.

I am not ignoring anything, although I don't remember being asked to address that.  What is the question?  A full-sized 9mm handgun typically holds 17 rounds but one can often use a much larger magazine in that, too (although it would look strange and certainly be inconvenient because it sticks way out).  There is plenty of info on the 'net showing how a trained person can quickly and easily change magazines (hint, about 1 to 2 seconds).  50/17 = 3.  1 in the gun already, so that means 2 to 4 seconds of total downtime.  Not crippling.

Sure, a larger magazine is more convenient, and potentially more situationally deadly, but it is probably not a major factor with a well-prepared, crazy gunner on a rampage.

[mikeyw64]

It seems you may be deflecting here a bit. You can say with confidence that none of the British built weapons were sold illegally and floated across the waters? That they all came from the former Colonies or Libya?

I'm sure that there have been occasions where British built firearms have been sold illegally and smuggled into/out of various countries

[Rick Hall]

I'm sure that there have been occasions where British built firearms have been sold illegally and smuggled into/out of various countries

 

Entertain the ignorant, what manufacturer? I know of at least one in Belgium, but have no clue about manufacturers in GB. Sorry.

Rick

[mikeyw64]

Entertain the ignorant, what manufacturer? I know of at least one in Belgium, but have no clue about manufacturers in GB. Sorry.

Rick

Well lets see , there was the already mentioned Sterling , although they went bust in 98. Mind you we were back in the 1970's  for this sub thread

Webley & Scott spring to mind as do BSA (although I think theyve probably long folded)

Technically BAE are firearms manufacturers as well then of course you have the various shotgun makers such as Purdey etc.


Found this list online


http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=449261&page=1



Or slightly broader


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_modern_armament_manufacturers

[Rick Hall]

Technically BAE are firearms manufacturers as well then of course you have the various shotgun makers such as Purdey etc.

I drooled for a Purdey side by side in my younger years. Mostly because I recreated an obsolete extractor for a friend. Fine firearms, beautiful examples of shooting sport artwork.

Rick

[Rhino]

Can't forget Holland and Holland. Arn't they the Roles Royce of firearms and made in London? I've seen some H&H guns but have never touched one.

[B.D.F.]

OFFTOPIC:

All / any of the English gun-makers who made double rifles around the turn of the century produced simply outstanding examples of the firearm maker's arts: Rigby, Holland and Holland, Purdy, Jeffery, and maybe a couple of others. Their products were simply the best they could be made with no thought to limits such as expense, manufacturing time, etc. They were, at least the large caliber (.400 and larger, 'dangerous game' calibers) almost always custom fitted to the purchaser, and included all the accouterments as well as a beautiful leather, wood and metal case.

They were almost all double rifles, exactly like a double- barreled shotgun but a true rifle, and often in impressively large sizes. Meant for the most dangerous game on the planet, and to be used and depended on where there were no spare parts, gunsmiths or support of any kind, they were as rugged as a brick in addition to being outstanding examples of precision and beauty. Most Americans do not even recognize them and thing they are a 'fat' double- barreled shotgun because they were almost never used in the US, where we always tended to prefer repeating firearms but if anyone ever gets a chance to see one, by all means do take the time to examine and enjoy it for a few moments.

BTW: because these are true rifles, they are actually very accurate. But the two bores do not share an axis and so are very slightly angled toward each other at the muzzle so the points of impact of each barrel crosses at a specified distance (and of course with a specified projectile, loading, etc.). The men who aligned these firearms were called regulators, and they would spend days fitting each rifle and shooting it from a bench to properly align the sights and both barrels. In the heavier calibers, this was truly punishing work. I read a story about one gentleman who suffered all sorts of physical damage from a career of doing this very thing on some of the most powerful rifles in the world. The size and power of these rifles was truly impressive; they were usually weighted with lead to make them 'sort of' manageable to shoot, and required 'gun bearers' to tote them around all day (multiple people, taking turns).

end OFFTOPIC:

Brian

Can't forget Holland and Holland. Arn't they the Roles Royce of firearms and made in London? I've seen some H&H guns but have never touched one.

[B.D.F.]

Found this today, 26 Feb. 2018.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/students-resolute-enter-school-shooting-045640708.html

Fifth paragraph down is the following:

"She's very lucky, very, very lucky" said Igor Nichiporenko, M.D., medical director of trauma services at Broward Health North, adding that the large caliber bullets "penetrated through her chest and abdomen."

This is exactly the type of incorrect statement, made by a learned person, a physician, that leads to so much general misunderstanding and outright errors that 'everyone knows' to be the truth. No one nor any authoritative source I am aware of or can find considers a .223 or 5.56 NATO to be a 'large caliber' in any way, shape or fashion.

Please understand I am not in any way trying to minimize this victim's injuries nor in any way shrugging off her extremely, apparently life- threatening injuries from multiple gunshots. I am just pointing out how falsehoods get mixed in with facts and are presented as 'evidence' in these types of contentious situations (gun control, nothing to do with this specific tragedy). And I am not trying to belittle the physician either, he simply made a mistake as we all do. But when these types of mistakes slide over into 'facts', it is unfortunate and leads to incorrect conclusions on the parts of many on- lookers.

Brian

[mikeyw64]

So I found this picture of common bullet sizes on the interwebs.

There are 18 bullets shown so working on the small , medium & large principle that very neatly gives us  6 of each size calibre

Found this today, 26 Feb. 2018.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/students-resolute-enter-school-shooting-045640708.html

Fifth paragraph down is the following:

"She's very lucky, very, very lucky" said Igor Nichiporenko, M.D., medical director of trauma services at Broward Health North, adding that the large caliber bullets "penetrated through her chest and abdomen."

This is exactly the type of incorrect statement, made by a learned person, a physician, that leads to so much general misunderstanding and outright errors that 'everyone knows' to be the truth. No one nor any authoritative source I am aware of or can find considers a .223 or 5.56 NATO to be a 'large caliber' in any way, shape or fashion.

Please understand I am not in any way trying to minimize this victim's injuries nor in any way shrugging off her extremely, apparently life- threatening injuries from multiple gunshots. I am just pointing out how falsehoods get mixed in with facts and are presented as 'evidence' in these types of contentious situations (gun control, nothing to do with this specific tragedy). And I am not trying to belittle the physician either, he simply made a mistake as we all do. But when these types of mistakes slide over into 'facts', it is unfortunate and leads to incorrect conclusions on the parts of many on- lookers.

Brian

[Conniesaki]

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2018/02/23/serial-failure-heres-how-government-totally-dropped-the-ball-in-stopping-florid-n2453448

Good summary of the so many failures and warning signs.  Cruz might have just as well walked around with a sign saying "I am a ticking time bomb.  Please stop me."

...

... but if he did, people probably would have either chuckled or thought he was just some odd feller trying to get attention, and after the first few times of seeing him wear it people would've gotten used to and thought not much of it.

It sure seems like there's no solution to trying to predict and stop this kind of crime before damage is done.

[B.D.F.]

There are several errors in that placement, starting with a .22 LR being more 'powerful' than a .380, a 9mm being more powerful than a .40 S&W, a 5.56 NATO being more powerful than a 7.62 X 39 (standard caliber of AK-47, SKS and other similar firearms), the 5.56 NATO also being more powerful than the .300 Blackout, the 7.62 X 54R being more powerful than the 7.62 NATO and the 12 ga. being more powerful than the .50 BMG and very possibly, the 30-06 Springfield.

I would not use that particular chart for firearm cartridge instruction or proof myself. 

But back to rifle calibers, I would claim that the 5.56 NATO is the least powerful rifle cartridge (primarily rifle, some knock- off lever actions use .357 magnum though it absolutely IS a pistol caliber) in that chart.

But before we argue, we need to decide on what defines 'power' as it applies to cartridges anyway. We can use muzzle energy, or what is commonly accepted by the hunting community as acceptable 'power' for various game, etc. But again, by either of those two standards, the 5.56 NATO will fall well behind both .30 caliber cartridges to its left in that chart.

Brian

So I found this picture of common bullet sizes on the interwebs.

There are 18 bullets shown so working on the small , medium & large principle that very neatly gives us  6 of each size calibre

[mikeyw64]

my tongue may have been slightly in my cheek.

On the other hand there are lies, damned lies & statistics

All depend s on how you define "large"


Is it physical size or based on power?

It's the same with cycles , a small bike may be more powerful than a large bike, depends whether you're measuring it on physical size, capacity, horespower, torque

There are several errors in that placement, starting with a .22 LR being more 'powerful' than a .380, a 9mm being more powerful than a .40 S&W, a 5.56 NATO being more powerful than a 7.62 X 39 (standard caliber of AK-47, SKS and other similar firearms), the 5.56 NATO also being more powerful than the .300 Blackout, the 7.62 X 54R being more powerful than the 7.62 NATO and the 12 ga. being more powerful than the .50 BMG and very possibly, the 30-06 Springfield.

I would not use that particular chart for firearm cartridge instruction or proof myself. 

But back to rifle calibers, I would claim that the 5.56 NATO is the least powerful rifle cartridge (primarily rifle, some knock- off lever actions use .357 magnum though it absolutely IS a pistol caliber) in that chart.

But before we argue, we need to decide on what defines 'power' as it applies to cartridges anyway. We can use muzzle energy, or what is commonly accepted by the hunting community as acceptable 'power' for various game, etc. But again, by either of those two standards, the 5.56 NATO will fall well behind both .30 caliber cartridges to its left in that chart.

Brian

[maxtog]

I would not use that particular chart for firearm cartridge instruction or proof myself. 

Me neither.  They also left off all the other small calibers, [except the 22LR which is misplaced- the 380 is MASSIVELY more powerful than a .22LR- 3 times the weight and double the energy] .32, .22 short, .22 magnum, .25, I am sure I am missing some in there.

[sanmo]

I am not ignoring anything, although I don't remember being asked to address that.  What is the question?  A full-sized 9mm handgun typically holds 17 rounds but one can often use a much larger magazine in that, too (although it would look strange and certainly be inconvenient because it sticks way out).  There is plenty of info on the 'net showing how a trained person can quickly and easily change magazines (hint, about 1 to 2 seconds).  50/17 = 3.  1 in the gun already, so that means 2 to 4 seconds of total downtime.  Not crippling.

Sure, a larger magazine is more convenient, and potentially more situationally deadly, but it is probably not a major factor with a well-prepared, crazy gunner on a rampage.

Just to be clear, this near equivalency of a 9mm handgun with a 17 round magazine and a couple of extra magazines to a semi-automatic rifle with a 50 round magazine can be achieved by a 19 y.o. punk with an addled mind and probably shitting his pants during the mayhem? We are not talking about a Navy SEAL here, right?