Mass Murder by Blade, you Vast Idiots

kelly4

Well-Known Member
What was the bar on blowing up Federal Buildings before Timothy McVeigh came along?

Once again, were those other drivers driving F350's, with 35"mudders, jacked up to run over the fallen, lead by plows. Did they pick the places that can do the most damage with this machine? NO.
 

Beefbisquit

Well-Known Member
What was the bar on blowing up Federal Buildings before Timothy McVeigh came along?

Once again, were those other drivers driving F350's, with 35"mudders, jacked up to run over the fallen, lead by plows. Did they pick the places that can do the most damage with this machine? NO.
No, and apparently it's not a good idea because no one has tried it. It would seem, that when murderers weigh their options, getting their hands on a jacked-up, F-350 with 'mudders' on it, doesn't pop to the front of their minds. You'd think if vehicles were so good at killing people, tanks wouldn't have turrets they'd just chase people down and run them over.

What's that saying about a free market and weeding out bad ideas?


EDIT:

Worst School Massacre in US history:
Bath, Michigan School Massacre. 1927.Murder accomplished with explosives. 44 victims (equal to the Columbine and Virginia Tech massacres combined).

Worst Domestic Terrorist Attack in US History:
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building bombing. 4/19/95. Murder accomplished with a rental truck full of fertilizer based explosives. 168 dead (including many children in an onsite day care).

Worst Foreign based Terrorist Attack in US History:
September 11, 2001 attacks on NYC, PA, Pentagon. Murder accomplished with box cutters and commerical airliners. ~3,000 people dead.

I'm not sure comparing a terorist attack to a mass murder is fair, else we should also be discussing the use of planes as a weapon, as they killed ~3000 in a single attack.
 

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
No, and apparently it's not a good idea because no one has tried it. It would seem, that when murderers weigh their options, getting their hands on a jacked-up, F-350 with 'mudders' on it, doesn't pop to the front of their minds. You'd think if vehicles were so good at killing people, tanks wouldn't have turrets they'd just chase people down and run them over.

What's that saying about a free market and weeding out bad ideas?
I hear Hi-Jacked Airliners are the best, far exceeding any gun massacre by a very very wide margin.

Why aren't you claiming it is the airliners that cause terrorists? You claim it is the firearms that cause murders.
 

kelly4

Well-Known Member
No, and apparently it's not a good idea because no one has tried it. It would seem, that when murderers weigh their options, getting their hands on a jacked-up, F-350 with 'mudders' on it, doesn't pop to the front of their minds. You'd think if vehicles were so good at killing people, tanks wouldn't have turrets they'd just chase people down and run them over.

What's that saying about a free market and weeding out bad ideas?
There you go with your stupid military shit, again. We are not talking war, military, Jihad, firecrackers, or anything overseas. That is why I put domestic in my question to you.

But, you know nothing but moving goal posts and changing the argument. Do you think I could drive a tank from my garage to the Avs game without drawing attention, dummy? Why do you keep talking about tanks? Do you like being confined in tight spaces with other men?
 

Beefbisquit

Well-Known Member
There you go with your stupid military shit, again. We are not talking war, military, Jihad, firecrackers, or anything overseas. That is why I put domestic in my question to you.

But, you know nothing but moving goal posts and changing the argument. Do you think I could drive a tank from my garage to the Avs game without drawing attention, dummy? Why do you keep talking about tanks? Do you like being confined in tight spaces with other men?
But trucks with plows are better for killing mass amounts of people, you said so yourself.

Either they're better than guns at killing mass amounts of people or they're not. Why does it matter where they do the killing? Or is it that trucks are only better @ killing in your specific scenario where people don't move out of the way, are all blind and deaf, and are aren't sure what to do when a truck is barreling at them @ 50mph?

Basically people have to pretend to be bowling pins AND pretend they don't see the bowling ball coming.

Or...

you can shoot someone without them ever seeing or hearing you, and they'll be dead before anyone even hears a noise.

Please can we PLEASE stop this retarded argument about trucks with plows being a better instrument for killing than guns?
 

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
A couple things. First, none of the items you posted have ALL the advantages of a gun, you just found another reason guns trump all of the things you listed (As one thing with 6 qualities is better than 16 things each with one of those 6 qualities).
despite all this, even before guns were invented, people still found a way to kill other people and even large critters like mammoths and elephants.



Second, neither a crossbow nor a longbow are cheaper than a gun, unless you are buying a children's version.
ha ha ha ha ha

no. youre fucking wrong.



Third, Armor Piercing Bullets and Hollow Point Bullets are opposites.
Armor piercing bullets are solid and heavy with a hardened tip to punch through armor.
no shit? really?


They cause less damage to soft tissue as they do not deform or break up upon impact.
no? really? i had no idea that FMJ or Ball ammo doesnt deform. you might wanna tell the US Army about that.

Hollow Point Bullets are light, and (as the name implies, hollow) and the massive amount of damage they cause is due to the fact that they deform and break up upon impact, causing more tissue damage and leaving a much larger exit wound (Or breaking apart completely inside the body and leaving no exit wound, even worse).
the sort of thing only a person who doesnt know shit about firearms or terminal ballistics would claim.

hollow point and yes, even soft tip bullets are designed to expend their energy on the target rather than passing through. the "soft tissue damage" you are talking about is a "temporary wound channel" which is, as the name implies TEMPORARY.

the flesh deforms and then returns to it's original state, which looks dramatic on high speed video but DOES NOT KILL.

science and medicine have long ago dismissed these claims

Your claim that "A bullet wound is a bullet wound" is absurdly naive and betrays a tragic misunderstanding of both physics and firearms, as is saying that they are all "equally difficult to repair", but even you know this as you immediately contradict yourself by saying that "Each one is very different and performs differently".
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

no, really, thats dumb as shit. to anchor game a responsible hunter ALWAYS uses soft tip or hollow point ammo.
ball ammo is used by the military due to an obsolete and idiotic belief in the 1900's that hollow points are "cruel and unusual" and are "designed to kill" which is the stupidest claim this side of the flat earth looneys

ALL bullets are designed to kill. hollow points and soft tips dont kill you any deader than a well placed ball round.


But way to make several unrelated and incorrect assertions that, even if true, have little to no bearing on the actual discussion.
fascinating.

so youre saying that Black Talon hollow points are NOT armour piercing?

perhaps thats why i said that those claims were BULLSHIT genius.

you might wanna hunt a critter or two, dress your kills and then re-evaluate your assertions.

ball ammo and AP ammo DOES deform, just often not by design. but they still can kill quite effectively. hollow points are not any more lethal than any other well placed round.

the 5.56nato round was extensively redesigned FOR DEFORMATION and fragmentation. the only reason it doesnt have a hollow point is a retarded rule in the geneva convention banning "dumdum bullets"

cops, federal agents, sherifs, the US marshals, and every other law enforcement agency use hollow points exclusively, because they work better than ball ammo for putting the perp on the gound, not because they cause gruesome traumatic wounds which resist medical intervention.

stop watching CSI, it's rotting your brain
 

kelly4

Well-Known Member
But trucks with plows are better for killing mass amounts of people, you said so yourself.

Either they're better than guns at killing mass amounts of people or they're not. Why does it matter where they do the killing? Or is it that trucks are only better @ killing in your specific scenario where people don't move out of the way, are all blind and deaf, and are aren't sure what to do when a truck is barreling at them @ 50mph?

Basically people have to pretend to be bowling pins AND pretend they don't see the bowling ball coming.

Or...

you can shoot someone without them ever seeing or hearing you, and they'll be dead before anyone even hears a noise.

Please can we PLEASE stop this retarded argument about trucks with plows being a better instrument for killing than guns?
Sorry, I didn't know that this conversation was changed to what kills best on a battle field.


In that case...nuclear warhead, FTW. Why are you talking about pussy guns and tanks? I still think you like tight spaces with other men.
































Nuclear Warhead, Motherfuckerz!
 

Beefbisquit

Well-Known Member
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

no, really, thats dumb as shit. to anchor game a responsible hunter ALWAYS uses soft tip or hollow point ammo.
ball ammo is used by the military due to an obsolete and idiotic belief in the 1900's that hollow points are "cruel and unusual" and are "designed to kill" which is the stupidest claim this side of the flat earth looneys
We both agree that HP ammo is designed to use up all its energy, instead of causing a pass through, that's one of the benefits to LEO use. If the round is transferring more energy into the target, by default, more damage is going to be done. That's why HP ammo does 'more damage', because it does its job as designed, it uses up its energy in the target. The flattening of the round makes a larger wound cavity as well. The flatter the round, and wider the expansion, the faster the energy is transferred and the bigger the hole.

ALL bullets are designed to kill. hollow points and soft tips dont kill you any deader than a well placed ball round.
Any shot to the right spot is a kill, but the resulting wound from a pass through with a FMJ is smaller than that of a HP.

ball ammo and AP ammo DOES deform, just often not by design. but they still can kill quite effectively. hollow points are not any more lethal than any other well placed round.
Key wording here is 'well placed'. For a 'not so well placed' round, it could make a big difference.

the 5.56nato round was extensively redesigned FOR DEFORMATION and fragmentation. the only reason it doesnt have a hollow point is a retarded rule in the geneva convention banning "dumdum bullets"
On course, we were taught 556 was designed to bounce around inside you.... kind of morbid, but it's a bullet after all.

cops, federal agents, sherifs, the US marshals, and every other law enforcement agency use hollow points exclusively, because they work better than ball ammo for putting the perp on the gound, not because they cause gruesome traumatic wounds which resist medical intervention.
And less penetration power, e.g. walls in a condo, etc.

stop watching CSI, it's rotting your brain
He was right on some things.
 

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
WTF are you talking about?
if you wish to make absurd comments, you must expect absurd responses

He made a comment specifically regarding killing people with a snowplow and truck.
yep. and you went off the rails with all the reasons why "Guns are bad Mmmm'kay"

"Regular bullets" are not FMJ. "Regular bullets" expand so they use up more energy, and thus more damage. FMJ will more likely wound than kill, although they do posses more ability to penetrate body armor. In war, wouding is better tha killing becuase it takes resources to care for the wounded.
"regular bullets" would be FMJ or Ball slugs, hollow points are hardly "regular", as they are designed to do more than be a simple projectile.

Some of your points were pretty funny although completely unrelated to the topic, and pointless for the most part.
wait till i start riffing on food trucks and carry-on baggage rules.

HP rounds expand much better than soft tip lead bullets, and cause a large wound cavity. Also, there are some pretty insane rounds out now! Ever see the "G2 R.I.P"?
in rifles a soft point can get the job done without the destabilizing effects of the cavity, allowing for longer range shots with a better ballistic co-efficient

[video snipped]

Looks SOOOOO BADASS....
and it's a frangible round, illegal in many states and many countries.
being solid copper also makes it illegal in many jurisdictions, like california, where bullets made of any material other than lead are illegal (lulz, they think that copper and bronze bullets are "armour piercing cop killers") and bullets containing lead may soon be illegal.

that video was pretty douchey. the narrator was using words he doesnt understand, in a sequence designed to make him sound "literate" but really just made him sound like this guy:

[video=youtube;Izpa9D7c77U]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Izpa9D7c77U[/video]
 

Beefbisquit

Well-Known Member
Sorry, I didn't know that this conversation was changed to what kills best on a battle field.


In that case...nuclear warhead, FTW. Why are you talking about pussy guns and tanks? I still think you like tight spaces with other men.




Nuclear Warhead, Motherfuckerz!
[Trucks with snow plows are] a better choice than a gun if you want a higher death toll in a mass killing.
Trucks are better at killing mass amounts of people than guns.
 

Beefbisquit

Well-Known Member
if you wish to make absurd comments, you must expect absurd responses



yep. and you went off the rails with all the reasons why "Guns are bad Mmmm'kay"



"regular bullets" would be FMJ or Ball slugs, hollow points are hardly "regular", as they are designed to do more than be a simple projectile.

wait till i start riffing on food trucks and carry-on baggage rules.



in rifles a soft point can get the job done without the destabilizing effects of the cavity, allowing for longer range shots with a better ballistic co-efficient

[video snipped]



and it's a frangible round, illegal in many states and many countries.
being solid copper also makes it illegal in many jurisdictions, like california, where bullets made of any material other than lead are illegal (lulz, they think that copper and bronze bullets are "armour piercing cop killers") and bullets containing lead may soon be illegal.

that video was pretty douchey. the narrator was using words he doesnt understand, in a sequence designed to make him sound "literate" but really just made him sound like this guy:

[video=youtube;Izpa9D7c77U]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Izpa9D7c77U[/video]
I know what a frangible round is, and this is pretty damn unique. Frangible bullets are usually small game rounds, used on shit like rats, and are purposed to prevent holes in barn/factory walls. They're also not sharpened. Frangible bullets also don't have a 'core' that stays intact for penetration. The point is to basically disintegrate upon impact to transfer as much energy as fast as possible into the target. These do not share that function.

Again, really fucking cool.
 

kelly4

Well-Known Member
Beefy, how many people do you think I could actually kill in my scenario? 2? 6? 10?

How many will die before a cop throws down spike strips? LOL!
 

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
I know what a frangible round is, and this is pretty damn unique. Frangible bullets are usually small game rounds, used on shit like rats, and are purposed to prevent holes in barn/factory walls. They're also not sharpened. Frangible bullets also don't have a 'core' that stays intact for penetration. The point is to basically disintegrate upon impact to transfer as much energy as fast as possible into the target. These do not share that function.

Again, really fucking cool.
You said that HP rounds were designed to not go through walls and such, which is 100% wrong.
Also the 5.56 was NOT designed to bounce around inside of you. It may be more likely, but it was not designed that way since Geneva conventions would make that illegal.
the flechette round was actually designed to bounce around inside of you, but again, Geneva convention forbids its use.
 

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
Beefy, how many people do you think I could actually kill in my scenario? 2? 6? 10?

How many will die before a cop throws down spike strips? LOL!
Beefy believes that a single shot .410 is more deadly than a drunk teen in a Camaro going 140 MPH.
 

Beefbisquit

Well-Known Member
Beefy, how many people do you think I could actually kill in my scenario? 2? 6? 10?

How many will die before a cop throws down spike strips? LOL!
Or you crash? Or someone with a CCW permit shoots you? Or in running someone over something in your truck breaks? Or someone smashes a car/truck into you?

I'm not sure honestly. It would depend on a lot of circumstances, but theoretically the potential for killing mass amounts of people in a vehicle is probably pretty high if all the cards fell your way.

Theoretically, if everything went perfectly, how many people do you think it would be possible to kill with any number of, and model of, firearms/ammo that a person could pick from?
 

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
I know what a frangible round is, and this is pretty damn unique. Frangible bullets are usually small game rounds, used on shit like rats, and are purposed to prevent holes in barn/factory walls. They're also not sharpened. Frangible bullets also don't have a 'core' that stays intact for penetration. The point is to basically disintegrate upon impact to transfer as much energy as fast as possible into the target. These do not share that function.

Again, really fucking cool.
i got some pre-ban frangible rounds, designed to split into 4 projectiles after impact, and they share many design characteristics with the bullets in that video. 3 smaller pre-cut segments, and a larger base section. even some partition slugs are designed to split into a heavy penetrator and a lighter fragment for a second wound channel.

those bullets are interesting, but i would like to see how they fly, and test their real world effectiveness.

i suspect those bullets will be inaccurate as fuck once they move a few yards downrange, and their penetration claims are dubious.
 

Beefbisquit

Well-Known Member
i got some pre-ban frangible rounds, designed to split into 4 projectiles after impact, and they share many design characteristics with the bullets in that video. 3 smaller pre-cut segments, and a larger base section. even some partition slugs are designed to split into a heavy penetrator and a lighter fragment for a second wound channel.

those bullets are interesting, but i would like to see how they fly, and test their real world effectiveness.

i suspect those bullets will be inaccurate as fuck once they move a few yards downrange, and their penetration claims are dubious.
Yeah, hard to say really. They'd need to have a perfect shape in order to fly well, the tiniest tiniest difference would cause drastic changes in their trajectory. I knew a bunch of guys that shot competition .22LR shoots, and their ammo was nuts... they used to file and polish it to ensure accuracy.
 
Top