One Nation, Under Gun...

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: upsciLLion

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Actually, i see these threads with people hunting with hand guns and you think that the US have people knowing how to use their weapons? Heh.

I've got an 30-06 with a scope that can hit a penny between your fingers half a mile away, but that doesn't mean much, does it?

I grew up around guns, i've always had them around me since then, right now, i'm in Kabul, and you can take three guesses on the equipment i'm carrying and you'd have three wrong guesses.

Yanks are stupid as shit from what i can tell, they even argue the second amendment as if it would really help to have plinking guns against attack helicopters, fighter jets and tanks.

We get to have fully automatic rifles though, and the licence for it is easy to aquire.

Half a mile is ~800 meters. The diameter of a penny is .75 inches. If 1 MOA = 1 inch groups at 100 meters, then that means your rifle is .75/8 = .09375 MOA. Not even a ridiculously riced out Remington 700P can do that. Get fucking real, dude.

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Well, the reporter is right, a sound supressor destroys every chance of accuracy you have and should only be used when absolutely required. For target practice... heh, laughable.

Shorter barrels means less accuracy, these guns like th 3" barreled guns are not meant to do anything but killing someone close range, you can argue against that all you like but it's still true.

Shorter barrels do not mean less accuracy. If all other things are equal, a shorter barrel will only result in a lower muzzle velocity of the bullet exiting the barrel. 😛

LOL, but he can hit a flee with a glock 19 from 5 miles away, cuz he said so....

Lol yeah, because i mentioned a ***** glock (i'd never own one of them, they are horrible pistols) and five miles, i didn't mention an 30-06 rifle with a scope on 800 meters hitting within 0.75 inches...

And aren't you the gay guy who solicited me for sex? Well?

It's as true as the BS you wrote to ridicule me moron.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: upsciLLion

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Actually, i see these threads with people hunting with hand guns and you think that the US have people knowing how to use their weapons? Heh.

I've got an 30-06 with a scope that can hit a penny between your fingers half a mile away, but that doesn't mean much, does it?

I grew up around guns, i've always had them around me since then, right now, i'm in Kabul, and you can take three guesses on the equipment i'm carrying and you'd have three wrong guesses.

Yanks are stupid as shit from what i can tell, they even argue the second amendment as if it would really help to have plinking guns against attack helicopters, fighter jets and tanks.

We get to have fully automatic rifles though, and the licence for it is easy to aquire.

Half a mile is ~800 meters. The diameter of a penny is .75 inches. If 1 MOA = 1 inch groups at 100 meters, then that means your rifle is .75/8 = .09375 MOA. Not even a ridiculously riced out Remington 700P can do that. Get fucking real, dude.

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Well, the reporter is right, a sound supressor destroys every chance of accuracy you have and should only be used when absolutely required. For target practice... heh, laughable.

Shorter barrels means less accuracy, these guns like th 3" barreled guns are not meant to do anything but killing someone close range, you can argue against that all you like but it's still true.

Shorter barrels do not mean less accuracy. If all other things are equal, a shorter barrel will only result in a lower muzzle velocity of the bullet exiting the barrel. 😛

LOL, but he can hit a flee with a glock 19 from 5 miles away, cuz he said so....

Lol yeah, because i mentioned a ***** glock (i'd never own one of them, they are horrible pistols) and five miles, i didn't mention an 30-06 rifle with a scope on 800 meters hitting within 0.75 inches...

And aren't you the gay guy who solicited me for sex? Well?

It's as true as the BS you wrote to ridicule me moron.

Its called over exageration, kind of like you and your marksmanship claims....

Glocks are decent for concealed carry use, especially since I got it cheap with my law enforcement discount.

 

[upsciLLion]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Wow, you know so many things that are just wrong.

It's not very hard to use a bolt 30-06 and hit five shots from 800 meters within .75 inches, in fact, i'd suggest that anyone who can't is a lousy shot.

Actually, on handguns the shorter barrel will mean that that the accuracy is greatly diminished since the rifles will make the bullet spin but not around it's own axis as it leaves the barrel.

You just don't have a clue when it comes to guns, do you?

Haha, apparently not, bud. 😛

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: upsciLLion

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Actually, i see these threads with people hunting with hand guns and you think that the US have people knowing how to use their weapons? Heh.

I've got an 30-06 with a scope that can hit a penny between your fingers half a mile away, but that doesn't mean much, does it?

I grew up around guns, i've always had them around me since then, right now, i'm in Kabul, and you can take three guesses on the equipment i'm carrying and you'd have three wrong guesses.

Yanks are stupid as shit from what i can tell, they even argue the second amendment as if it would really help to have plinking guns against attack helicopters, fighter jets and tanks.

We get to have fully automatic rifles though, and the licence for it is easy to aquire.

Half a mile is ~800 meters. The diameter of a penny is .75 inches. If 1 MOA = 1 inch groups at 100 meters, then that means your rifle is .75/8 = .09375 MOA. Not even a ridiculously riced out Remington 700P can do that. Get fucking real, dude.

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Well, the reporter is right, a sound supressor destroys every chance of accuracy you have and should only be used when absolutely required. For target practice... heh, laughable.

Shorter barrels means less accuracy, these guns like th 3" barreled guns are not meant to do anything but killing someone close range, you can argue against that all you like but it's still true.

Shorter barrels do not mean less accuracy. If all other things are equal, a shorter barrel will only result in a lower muzzle velocity of the bullet exiting the barrel. 😛

Wow, you know so many things that are just wrong.

It's not very hard to use a bolt 30-06 and hit five shots from 800 meters within .75 inches, in fact, i'd suggest that anyone who can't is a lousy shot.

Actually, on handguns the shorter barrel will mean that that the accuracy is greatly diminished since the rifles will make the bullet spin but not around it's own axis as it leaves the barrel.

You just don't have a clue when it comes to guns, do you?

Bwhahaha. 3/4 MOA @ 800 meters. Sure bub. There's not a gun on the planet that can do that.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: piasabird
Also some handguns are purposely designed with shorter barrels and in a smaller size so they will fit in the pocket of a would-be thief or killer.

Puh-lease.

Sound just like the reporter yesterday who said a sound suppressor is only good for killers so they can shoot people without being heard.

:roll:

Well, the reporter is right, a sound supressor destroys every chance of accuracy you have and should only be used when absolutely required. For target practice... heh, laughable.

Shorter barrels means less accuracy, these guns like th 3" barreled guns are not meant to do anything but killing someone close range, you can argue against that all you like but it's still true.

I'd say you just lost all your credibility right there. I can shoot better than 1" MOA at 100 yards with a Remington 700 .308, supressed, with subsonic loads. If you need more examples of long range supressed, accurate shooting, check out the Precision Rifles section of AR15.com.

A supressor has no impact whatsoever on the accuracy of a gun. I can confidently hit the head sized metal plates at 15 yards with my HK USP Tactical with a Gemtech supressor.

Since you have all of these guns then i'd ask you to do a test for me, but some other day, i'll pm you about it, right now, i have to go.

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: upsciLLion

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Wow, you know so many things that are just wrong.

It's not very hard to use a bolt 30-06 and hit five shots from 800 meters within .75 inches, in fact, i'd suggest that anyone who can't is a lousy shot.

Actually, on handguns the shorter barrel will mean that that the accuracy is greatly diminished since the rifles will make the bullet spin but not around it's own axis as it leaves the barrel.

You just don't have a clue when it comes to guns, do you?

Haha, apparently not, bud. 😛

You're full of it. .75" grouping 800 meters is straight up impossible, with any rifle, shooter, weather or luck.

The most precise, expensive long range weapons in the world group around 5" at 800 meters. And those are about $15,000, come with targetting computers to calculate windage, etc.

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: upsciLLion

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Actually, i see these threads with people hunting with hand guns and you think that the US have people knowing how to use their weapons? Heh.

I've got an 30-06 with a scope that can hit a penny between your fingers half a mile away, but that doesn't mean much, does it?

I grew up around guns, i've always had them around me since then, right now, i'm in Kabul, and you can take three guesses on the equipment i'm carrying and you'd have three wrong guesses.

Yanks are stupid as shit from what i can tell, they even argue the second amendment as if it would really help to have plinking guns against attack helicopters, fighter jets and tanks.

We get to have fully automatic rifles though, and the licence for it is easy to aquire.

Half a mile is ~800 meters. The diameter of a penny is .75 inches. If 1 MOA = 1 inch groups at 100 meters, then that means your rifle is .75/8 = .09375 MOA. Not even a ridiculously riced out Remington 700P can do that. Get fucking real, dude.

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Well, the reporter is right, a sound supressor destroys every chance of accuracy you have and should only be used when absolutely required. For target practice... heh, laughable.

Shorter barrels means less accuracy, these guns like th 3" barreled guns are not meant to do anything but killing someone close range, you can argue against that all you like but it's still true.

Shorter barrels do not mean less accuracy. If all other things are equal, a shorter barrel will only result in a lower muzzle velocity of the bullet exiting the barrel. 😛

Wow, you know so many things that are just wrong.

It's not very hard to use a bolt 30-06 and hit five shots from 800 meters within .75 inches, in fact, i'd suggest that anyone who can't is a lousy shot.

Actually, on handguns the shorter barrel will mean that that the accuracy is greatly diminished since the rifles will make the bullet spin but not around it's own axis as it leaves the barrel.

You just don't have a clue when it comes to guns, do you?

Bwhahaha. 3/4 MOA @ 800 meters. Sure bub. There's not a gun on the planet that can do that.

You're misusing the term MOA. Typically it means 1" MOA, which means that at 100 meters, the group should be under 1". At 800 meters, that rifle should shoot groups under 8".

The rifle I referenced above, the .408 Cheytac, is capable of 1" MOA @ 2700 meters. Meaning a group should be under 27" at those ranges.

But still, shooting a .75" group at 800 meters is bullshit. Can't be done.

 

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: upsciLLion

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Actually, i see these threads with people hunting with hand guns and you think that the US have people knowing how to use their weapons? Heh.

I've got an 30-06 with a scope that can hit a penny between your fingers half a mile away, but that doesn't mean much, does it?

I grew up around guns, i've always had them around me since then, right now, i'm in Kabul, and you can take three guesses on the equipment i'm carrying and you'd have three wrong guesses.

Yanks are stupid as shit from what i can tell, they even argue the second amendment as if it would really help to have plinking guns against attack helicopters, fighter jets and tanks.

We get to have fully automatic rifles though, and the licence for it is easy to aquire.

Half a mile is ~800 meters. The diameter of a penny is .75 inches. If 1 MOA = 1 inch groups at 100 meters, then that means your rifle is .75/8 = .09375 MOA. Not even a ridiculously riced out Remington 700P can do that. Get fucking real, dude.

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Well, the reporter is right, a sound supressor destroys every chance of accuracy you have and should only be used when absolutely required. For target practice... heh, laughable.

Shorter barrels means less accuracy, these guns like th 3" barreled guns are not meant to do anything but killing someone close range, you can argue against that all you like but it's still true.

Shorter barrels do not mean less accuracy. If all other things are equal, a shorter barrel will only result in a lower muzzle velocity of the bullet exiting the barrel. 😛

Wow, you know so many things that are just wrong.

It's not very hard to use a bolt 30-06 and hit five shots from 800 meters within .75 inches, in fact, i'd suggest that anyone who can't is a lousy shot.

Actually, on handguns the shorter barrel will mean that that the accuracy is greatly diminished since the rifles will make the bullet spin but not around it's own axis as it leaves the barrel.

You just don't have a clue when it comes to guns, do you?

Bwhahaha. 3/4 MOA @ 800 meters. Sure bub. There's not a gun on the planet that can do that.

Id have to agree....Text

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: upsciLLion

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Actually, i see these threads with people hunting with hand guns and you think that the US have people knowing how to use their weapons? Heh.

I've got an 30-06 with a scope that can hit a penny between your fingers half a mile away, but that doesn't mean much, does it?

I grew up around guns, i've always had them around me since then, right now, i'm in Kabul, and you can take three guesses on the equipment i'm carrying and you'd have three wrong guesses.

Yanks are stupid as shit from what i can tell, they even argue the second amendment as if it would really help to have plinking guns against attack helicopters, fighter jets and tanks.

We get to have fully automatic rifles though, and the licence for it is easy to aquire.

Half a mile is ~800 meters. The diameter of a penny is .75 inches. If 1 MOA = 1 inch groups at 100 meters, then that means your rifle is .75/8 = .09375 MOA. Not even a ridiculously riced out Remington 700P can do that. Get fucking real, dude.

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Well, the reporter is right, a sound supressor destroys every chance of accuracy you have and should only be used when absolutely required. For target practice... heh, laughable.

Shorter barrels means less accuracy, these guns like th 3" barreled guns are not meant to do anything but killing someone close range, you can argue against that all you like but it's still true.

Shorter barrels do not mean less accuracy. If all other things are equal, a shorter barrel will only result in a lower muzzle velocity of the bullet exiting the barrel. 😛

Wow, you know so many things that are just wrong.

It's not very hard to use a bolt 30-06 and hit five shots from 800 meters within .75 inches, in fact, i'd suggest that anyone who can't is a lousy shot.

Actually, on handguns the shorter barrel will mean that that the accuracy is greatly diminished since the rifles will make the bullet spin but not around it's own axis as it leaves the barrel.

You just don't have a clue when it comes to guns, do you?

Bwhahaha. 3/4 MOA @ 800 meters. Sure bub. There's not a gun on the planet that can do that.

Heh, there are plenty of guns that can do that, it's not the gun, it's the shooter, obviously you all suck at shooting in the US if you can't do that. With only iron sights, i'd get fairly close still to doing that, but with the scope, how could you NOT do that?

I've fired off 13 rounds with that 30-06 on a target 1200 meters away, all within 2 centimeters. A couple of them just grazed the hole already made.

So that it is doable? I'm going to Arkansas soon, i'll meet you at fort Smith and we'll talk about it then and you can take me to your closest range and i'll show you how it's done.

Ok son?

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: upsciLLion

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Actually, i see these threads with people hunting with hand guns and you think that the US have people knowing how to use their weapons? Heh.

I've got an 30-06 with a scope that can hit a penny between your fingers half a mile away, but that doesn't mean much, does it?

I grew up around guns, i've always had them around me since then, right now, i'm in Kabul, and you can take three guesses on the equipment i'm carrying and you'd have three wrong guesses.

Yanks are stupid as shit from what i can tell, they even argue the second amendment as if it would really help to have plinking guns against attack helicopters, fighter jets and tanks.

We get to have fully automatic rifles though, and the licence for it is easy to aquire.

Half a mile is ~800 meters. The diameter of a penny is .75 inches. If 1 MOA = 1 inch groups at 100 meters, then that means your rifle is .75/8 = .09375 MOA. Not even a ridiculously riced out Remington 700P can do that. Get fucking real, dude.

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Well, the reporter is right, a sound supressor destroys every chance of accuracy you have and should only be used when absolutely required. For target practice... heh, laughable.

Shorter barrels means less accuracy, these guns like th 3" barreled guns are not meant to do anything but killing someone close range, you can argue against that all you like but it's still true.

Shorter barrels do not mean less accuracy. If all other things are equal, a shorter barrel will only result in a lower muzzle velocity of the bullet exiting the barrel. 😛

Wow, you know so many things that are just wrong.

It's not very hard to use a bolt 30-06 and hit five shots from 800 meters within .75 inches, in fact, i'd suggest that anyone who can't is a lousy shot.

Actually, on handguns the shorter barrel will mean that that the accuracy is greatly diminished since the rifles will make the bullet spin but not around it's own axis as it leaves the barrel.

You just don't have a clue when it comes to guns, do you?

Bwhahaha. 3/4 MOA @ 800 meters. Sure bub. There's not a gun on the planet that can do that.

You're misusing the term MOA. Typically it means 1" MOA, which means that at 100 meters, the group should be under 1". At 800 meters, that rifle should shoot groups under 8".

The rifle I referenced above, the .408 Cheytac, is capable of 1" MOA @ 2700 meters. Meaning a group should be under 27" at those ranges.

But still, shooting a .75" group at 800 meters is bullshit. Can't be done.

I shouldn't have put moa in, should have just said inches, I know it extrapolates out. I was just giggling too hard at the claim.

Only way that small of a group can be made at 800 meters is with an 800 meter barrel.

 

[Triumph]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Actually, at the time the second amendment was written handguns and rifles were the most modern military arms and so the people could have them and fight their government.

If the government controls US military, what you are going to be plinking on with your ridiculous weapons are tanks and attack choppers, fully equipped F18-s and so on.

If it was updated then all of the latest military equipment should be available to the average joe, heh, wouldn't THAT be fun? 😀

So it's lost it's purpose because it doesn't take more than one missile to destroy a large part of the charging militia.

American love their guns, it's toys for overgrown boys, there aren't many men in the US, most are just overgrown boys.

Toys don't kill, now do they.

Hehe, overgrown boys toys do kill, now don't they?

You need to rethink your defintiion of toy. Are knives toys too?

I can understand that someone such as yourself who has little to no firsthand knowledge of weapons can think of them as toys, and quite frankly people who think firearms are toys shouldn't have them. Over here we "Yanks" are smarter then that. 😛

Actually, i see these threads with people hunting with hand guns and you think that the US have people knowing how to use their weapons? Heh.

I've got an 30-06 with a scope that can hit a penny between your fingers half a mile away, but that doesn't mean much, does it?

I grew up around guns, i've always had them around me since then, right now, i'm in Kabul, and you can take three guesses on the equipment i'm carrying and you'd have three wrong guesses.

Yanks are stupid as shit from what i can tell, they even argue the second amendment as if it would really help to have plinking guns against attack helicopters, fighter jets and tanks.

We get to have fully automatic rifles though, and the licence for it is easy to aquire.

And you're a complete douche bag from what us yanks can tell, FOAD. You're condescension towards the US is getting really old.

Anyways, weren't you in some Iraq threads the other day gloating over how difficult a time the US army is having against a bunch of insurgents, armed mainly with small arms and assault rifles?

Actually, my condescension is directed to you and those like you, who refuse to realize that you have been played for fools for almost 8 years.

I think you and those like you should join us here and then we can talk about it.

No, idiot, Kabul is NOT in Iraq, i know you shitforbrains don't know your arse from your your elbow or Mexico from Russia on a map but i'm in Kabul which is (prepare to be surprised you stupid twat) in Afghanistan.

Afghanistan is the war to fight, Iraq, it's to keep idiots like you screaming yeeeeHAW all day long, or whatever, i know the reason why but i can't tell your puny little fat arse about it.

Now get out of my face and STAY out of my face, got that, little one?

Ok now you really ARE a douchebag. You assumed that because he's American, he supports the war in Iraq. Mistake on your part number one. Then you claimed he said Kabul was in Afghanistan. Mistake on your part number two. Mistake number three was not understanding what he called you out on - you say 2nd Amendment can't protect against tanks and fighter jets, yet in another thread you're berating us because we can't handle an insurgency with our tanks and fighter jets? Look up the definition of hypocrite.

And since you started throwing the insults around and taking the thread to an immature level, I'll say that the girly shorts that you guys wear in Afghanistan don't make you look very tough. "Ohhh blimey! It's bloody hot here, oy! Oy, right, ah heck this, we can't take the heat, barmy they are, I'm going to throw a wobbly if I have to keep wearing these, oy blimey, I fancy these fairy shorts will do me well. This mug needs his tea, bloody hell jolly good Queen Mum Big Ben double decker bus!"

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Actually, at the time the second amendment was written handguns and rifles were the most modern military arms and so the people could have them and fight their government.

If the government controls US military, what you are going to be plinking on with your ridiculous weapons are tanks and attack choppers, fully equipped F18-s and so on.

If it was updated then all of the latest military equipment should be available to the average joe, heh, wouldn't THAT be fun? 😀

So it's lost it's purpose because it doesn't take more than one missile to destroy a large part of the charging militia.

American love their guns, it's toys for overgrown boys, there aren't many men in the US, most are just overgrown boys.

Toys don't kill, now do they.

Hehe, overgrown boys toys do kill, now don't they?

You need to rethink your defintiion of toy. Are knives toys too?

I can understand that someone such as yourself who has little to no firsthand knowledge of weapons can think of them as toys, and quite frankly people who think firearms are toys shouldn't have them. Over here we "Yanks" are smarter then that. 😛

Actually, i see these threads with people hunting with hand guns and you think that the US have people knowing how to use their weapons? Heh.

I've got an 30-06 with a scope that can hit a penny between your fingers half a mile away, but that doesn't mean much, does it?

I grew up around guns, i've always had them around me since then, right now, i'm in Kabul, and you can take three guesses on the equipment i'm carrying and you'd have three wrong guesses.

Yanks are stupid as shit from what i can tell, they even argue the second amendment as if it would really help to have plinking guns against attack helicopters, fighter jets and tanks.

We get to have fully automatic rifles though, and the licence for it is easy to aquire.

And you're a complete douche bag from what us yanks can tell, FOAD. You're condescension towards the US is getting really old.

Anyways, weren't you in some Iraq threads the other day gloating over how difficult a time the US army is having against a bunch of insurgents, armed mainly with small arms and assault rifles?

Actually, my condescension is directed to you and those like you, who refuse to realize that you have been played for fools for almost 8 years.

I think you and those like you should join us here and then we can talk about it.

No, idiot, Kabul is NOT in Iraq, i know you shitforbrains don't know your arse from your your elbow or Mexico from Russia on a map but i'm in Kabul which is (prepare to be surprised you stupid twat) in Afghanistan.

Afghanistan is the war to fight, Iraq, it's to keep idiots like you screaming yeeeeHAW all day long, or whatever, i know the reason why but i can't tell your puny little fat arse about it.

Now get out of my face and STAY out of my face, got that, little one?

Wow, if you can point to where I said that you are in Iraq without editing my quote I'd love to see that. Work up on your reading skills then get back to me, k? I know where Kabul is btw... Sorry, I shouldn't have called you a douchebag, I should have called you an illiterate douchebag. You're such an E-tough guy, its cute.


Edit - BTW, I actually agree that Afghanistan is the place to fight, but we're in Iraq now, we have to deal with it. I see that in your drug induced rage you completely ignored my point about a bunch of insurgents armed mainly with small arms giving our military hell.....

Still waiting.....

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: upsciLLion

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Actually, i see these threads with people hunting with hand guns and you think that the US have people knowing how to use their weapons? Heh.

I've got an 30-06 with a scope that can hit a penny between your fingers half a mile away, but that doesn't mean much, does it?

I grew up around guns, i've always had them around me since then, right now, i'm in Kabul, and you can take three guesses on the equipment i'm carrying and you'd have three wrong guesses.

Yanks are stupid as shit from what i can tell, they even argue the second amendment as if it would really help to have plinking guns against attack helicopters, fighter jets and tanks.

We get to have fully automatic rifles though, and the licence for it is easy to aquire.

Half a mile is ~800 meters. The diameter of a penny is .75 inches. If 1 MOA = 1 inch groups at 100 meters, then that means your rifle is .75/8 = .09375 MOA. Not even a ridiculously riced out Remington 700P can do that. Get fucking real, dude.

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Well, the reporter is right, a sound supressor destroys every chance of accuracy you have and should only be used when absolutely required. For target practice... heh, laughable.

Shorter barrels means less accuracy, these guns like th 3" barreled guns are not meant to do anything but killing someone close range, you can argue against that all you like but it's still true.

Shorter barrels do not mean less accuracy. If all other things are equal, a shorter barrel will only result in a lower muzzle velocity of the bullet exiting the barrel. 😛

Wow, you know so many things that are just wrong.

It's not very hard to use a bolt 30-06 and hit five shots from 800 meters within .75 inches, in fact, i'd suggest that anyone who can't is a lousy shot.

Actually, on handguns the shorter barrel will mean that that the accuracy is greatly diminished since the rifles will make the bullet spin but not around it's own axis as it leaves the barrel.

You just don't have a clue when it comes to guns, do you?

Bwhahaha. 3/4 MOA @ 800 meters. Sure bub. There's not a gun on the planet that can do that.

Heh, there are plenty of guns that can do that, it's not the gun, it's the shooter, obviously you all suck at shooting in the US if you can't do that. With only iron sights, i'd get fairly close still to doing that, but with the scope, how could you NOT do that?

I've fired off 13 rounds with that 30-06 on a target 1200 meters away, all within 2 centimeters. A couple of them just grazed the hole already made.

So that it is doable? I'm going to Arkansas soon, i'll meet you at fort Smith and we'll talk about it then and you can take me to your closest range and i'll show you how it's done.

Ok son?

Total fscking horseshit or you are just trolling.

Either that or you are confusing meters with centimeters...

 

[upsciLLion]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Heh, there are plenty of guns that can do that, it's not the gun, it's the shooter, obviously you all suck at shooting in the US if you can't do that. With only iron sights, i'd get fairly close still to doing that, but with the scope, how could you NOT do that?

I've fired off 13 rounds with that 30-06 on a target 1200 meters away, all within 2 centimeters. A couple of them just grazed the hole already made.

So that it is doable? I'm going to Arkansas soon, i'll meet you at fort Smith and we'll talk about it then and you can take me to your closest range and i'll show you how it's done.

Ok son?

I'll drink a gallon of your piss in under a minute if you can pull that off.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: upsciLLion

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Heh, there are plenty of guns that can do that, it's not the gun, it's the shooter, obviously you all suck at shooting in the US if you can't do that. With only iron sights, i'd get fairly close still to doing that, but with the scope, how could you NOT do that?

I've fired off 13 rounds with that 30-06 on a target 1200 meters away, all within 2 centimeters. A couple of them just grazed the hole already made.

So that it is doable? I'm going to Arkansas soon, i'll meet you at fort Smith and we'll talk about it then and you can take me to your closest range and i'll show you how it's done.

Ok son?

I'll drink a gallon of your piss in under a minute if you can pull that off.

LOL, funniest thing I've heard in a long time. :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: upsciLLion

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Heh, there are plenty of guns that can do that, it's not the gun, it's the shooter, obviously you all suck at shooting in the US if you can't do that. With only iron sights, i'd get fairly close still to doing that, but with the scope, how could you NOT do that?

I've fired off 13 rounds with that 30-06 on a target 1200 meters away, all within 2 centimeters. A couple of them just grazed the hole already made.

So that it is doable? I'm going to Arkansas soon, i'll meet you at fort Smith and we'll talk about it then and you can take me to your closest range and i'll show you how it's done.

Ok son?

I'll drink a gallon of your piss in under a minute if you can pull that off.

Yup. It's entirely impossible. By anyone. With any rifle.

 

[upsciLLion]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: upsciLLion

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Heh, there are plenty of guns that can do that, it's not the gun, it's the shooter, obviously you all suck at shooting in the US if you can't do that. With only iron sights, i'd get fairly close still to doing that, but with the scope, how could you NOT do that?

I've fired off 13 rounds with that 30-06 on a target 1200 meters away, all within 2 centimeters. A couple of them just grazed the hole already made.

So that it is doable? I'm going to Arkansas soon, i'll meet you at fort Smith and we'll talk about it then and you can take me to your closest range and i'll show you how it's done.

Ok son?

I'll drink a gallon of your piss in under a minute if you can pull that off.

Yup. It's entirely impossible. By anyone. With any rifle.

Good. I'm a thirsty bitch.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

I've fired off 13 rounds with that 30-06 on a target 1200 meters away, all within 2 centimeters. A couple of them just grazed the hole already made.

So that it is doable? I'm going to Arkansas soon, i'll meet you at fort Smith and we'll talk about it then and you can take me to your closest range and i'll show you how it's done.

Ok son?

Where in Arkansas? I'm 3 hours south of Ft Smith. If you can provide a range there I can bring whatever rifle and caliber you want. Or you can come down here since I have land to shoot on.

Have a Savage FP110 in .300Win Mag which is one of the flattest shooting cartridges out there. I'm not a great shot, but the rifle will do 1MOA or better with the right shooter. You're welcome to try your 800 meter claim.

 

[Darwin333]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Actually, at the time the second amendment was written handguns and rifles were the most modern military arms and so the people could have them and fight their government.

If the government controls US military, what you are going to be plinking on with your ridiculous weapons are tanks and attack choppers, fully equipped F18-s and so on.

If it was updated then all of the latest military equipment should be available to the average joe, heh, wouldn't THAT be fun? 😀

So it's lost it's purpose because it doesn't take more than one missile to destroy a large part of the charging militia.

American love their guns, it's toys for overgrown boys, there aren't many men in the US, most are just overgrown boys.

Toys don't kill, now do they.

Hehe, overgrown boys toys do kill, now don't they?

You need to rethink your defintiion of toy. Are knives toys too?

I can understand that someone such as yourself who has little to no firsthand knowledge of weapons can think of them as toys, and quite frankly people who think firearms are toys shouldn't have them. Over here we "Yanks" are smarter then that. 😛

Yanks are stupid as shit from what i can tell, they even argue the second amendment as if it would really help to have plinking guns against attack helicopters, fighter jets and tanks.

Helicopters, tanks and fighter jets are doing a hellofa job quelling the insurgency in Iraq aren't they?

I highly doubt you would have massive million man formations marching down the street with their shotguns and hunting rifles.

Since I am just a dumb yank, explain this to me. You have 100 million armed people uprising in a country as geographically large as the US. They are extremely unorganized and are fighting an urban/guerrilla type war. Exactly what targets do you give to the fighter jets to bomb? Where do you send the tanks? Where do you send the helicopters?

The US military is having trouble occupying a country the size of California with comparatively much fewer people fighting against them than there would be in a mass US uprising. So please enlighten us dumb yanks exactly how the military would accomplish something we can not do in Iraq especially considering the much larger scale (Iraq: total area 168,743 sq mi, population 26.8M - United States: total area 3,718,743 sq mi, population 302M).

 

[upsciLLion]

Originally posted by: Darwin333
So please enlighten us dumb yanks exactly how the military would accomplish something we can not do in Iraq especially considering the much larger scale (Iraq: total area 168,743 sq mi, population 26.8M - United States: total area 3,718,743 sq mi, population 302M).

They'd retrofit all the helicopters, fighter jets, and tanks with .30-06 bolt rifles. 😛

 

[nick1985]

Im happily awaiting the results of his 800 meter claim.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Actually, i see these threads with people hunting with hand guns and you think that the US have people knowing how to use their weapons? Heh.

Yeah, we also hunt with black powder rifles and bows. It just means you get more seasons/time to hunt. Of course I wouldn't expect a lot of people from England to know much about hunting... except what they read or see on TV.

I've got an 30-06 with a scope that can hit a penny between your fingers half a mile away, but that doesn't mean much, does it?

To me it means your pennies are a lot bigger then ours, that or your a terrible braggert, but I'm willing to give you the benifit of the doubt.... what little if there is?

I grew up around guns, i've always had them around me since then, right now, i'm in Kabul, and you can take three guesses on the equipment i'm carrying and you'd have three wrong guesses.

Why would I even care where you are or what your carrying??

Yanks are stupid as shit from what i can tell, they even argue the second amendment as if it would really help to have plinking guns against attack helicopters, fighter jets and tanks.

If things really got that bad all we need are firearms capable of taking out the offending politicians, judges, etc. We wouldn't fight our own boys and I highly doubt they would fight us. I would think an expert marksman such as yourself would realize that, perhaps your right and I'm stupid as shit?? 😕

We get to have fully automatic rifles though, and the licence for it is easy to aquire.

I don't know and don't really care what your laws are.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Well my offer is a real one if he's brave enough to take it.

Currently the world record for grouping at 1000 yards (915 meters) is 2.7".

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones
Well my offer is a real one if he's brave enough to take it.

Currently the world record for grouping at 1000 yards (915 meters) is 2.7".

Are you pulling my leg!?!?!?


Is that a 5 shot group and what caliber rifle?

Link if you have one, otherwise don't bother.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones
Well my offer is a real one if he's brave enough to take it.

Currently the world record for grouping at 1000 yards (915 meters) is 2.7".

Are you pulling my leg!?!?!?


Is that a 5 shot group and what caliber rifle?

Link if you have one, otherwise don't bother.

Don't get all worked up.

http://www.fcsa.org/visitors/worldrecords.htm

Light Gun
Single Target Group
Sheri Rasmussen
2.603? - 8/20/2006

Click Match Rules on the left. 5 shots @ 1000 yards in the range descriptions.