So I just survived a school shooting...

[manaman]

Don't be the guy who can't admit he said something stupid and is going to argue that idiocy into the ground if need be.

Your the guy saying a 9mm glock is more powerful than an ak47...

Larger refers to physical size, not power.

Keep that in mind as I once again repeat what I said, in more detail this time:

The 9mm bullet is actually larger then the 7.62mm bullet - many 9mm bullets actually weigh more then most 7.62mm bullets. 7.62mm bullets top out a little higher then the heaviest 9mm bullets, and the smallest 9mm bullets weigh a tiny bit less then the smallest 7.62mm bullets other then that they are pretty much similar in weight with the 9mm larger in diameter. The bullet is the projectile, the cartridge is the entire unfired package. The 7.62X39 cartridge is larger then the 9x19 but we where talking about the bullet and not the cartridge.

If you think it is laughably ridiculous then join the army and see what bullets can do for yourself.

I can't join the Army.

I served for five years in the US Air Force in combat communications before being injured by a bomb in Iraq and had a brush with not being able to walk. I was medically discharged with disability. I couldn't join any branch of the military if I wanted to.

I thought one of the rules of the escapist was no trolling?

Disagreeing with something you said is not trolling. It's also hard to imagine that I would have been around on this site for three years now and accumulated 12,000 some odd posts if I was trolling people all the time.

You also stated that you had a good chance of not successfully killing yourself with a 9mm weapon. I stated both weapons are equally effective at killing yourself. They are both up to preforming the task, the extra energy behind a the 7.62x39 cartridge is simply a waste, it's not needed in that situation.

snip (I was going to respond on a case by case thing, but there is simply to much information being exchanged here and even I was having trouble deciding which are a to place which tidbit)

Sorry I should clarify. There are no assault rifles available to civilians. You are completely correct that there are rifles geared entierly towards warfare. That's not the scope of civilian assault rifle bans, they are exist primarily to ban military looking weapons. The problem with the Federal Assault Weapons bad of 1994 (the one that expired in 2004) was that there was no legal definition of assault rifles prior to the act, and they defined it in the act to pretty much mean any military looking weapon, It baned a large amount of semi-automatic weapons. Cost alone would be a major factor in keeping true military weapons out of the hands of civilians. Who has $5,000 to drop on a saw, even through the ammo isn't overly expensive. Other guns can run up to or exceed the price of a new vehicle.

Because you noted military weapons:

They typically trained us using the M240B in three man teams. The weapons for our purposes where used as suppression fire from a fixed location. The three man team worked with one person firing and the other two adding extra defense or suppression fire with there weapons. Once the belt has been fired they reload and swap the barrel. We would also train for two man teams, and turret mounted applications. With slightly different procedures. Other smaller weapons like the M60, and the M249 could be used in the same situations but where typically used by one person.


For 9MM:


The .22LR is a popular varmint rifle cartridge, and plinking round. It is occasionally carried for defense, especially for the weight, cost, and concealing. While the 9mm is probably the most common cartridge carried for defense. It combines the best aspects of a defense weapon. It's easy to steady during rapid firing, it holds a respectable number of rounds (even in compact sizes) it's concealable, cheap, and reliable, with an effective amount of stopping power. There is nothing wrong with carrying a 9mm for personal defense. You will find (in my case as well as your case) some opt for other cartridges, especially compact handguns chambered for .40 S&W and .45 ACP (except I was never a fan of a subcompact .45). I carry a Glock 27 (subcompact .40 S&W) for instance.

I never intended to imply that there was more energy behind a 9mm bullet then the 7.62x39, only that it was larger, and in the case of killing oneself it was equal to the task. The person I was responding to implied that you had a good chance of not successfully killing yourself with a 9mm and that it was a much smaller round. Sure he could have been talking about total cartridge size, but you never know. I do believe he is incorrectly taking "larger" to mean more powerful however.

7.62x39 for military applications tends to have either a 123 or 154 gr. bullet while 9mm tends to have a 115(common target load) to 145 gr. bullet. They are right around the same weight in other words, with the 7.62mm edging out a bit on the top.

I'm quite sure the post you are responding to is rubbish.

Yes it was, and in this part you noted hydrostatic shock without using the term. I was wondering if you where families with it. I have heard about the habit of the the .50BMG to shred targets and remove limbs and those I believe, cutting in half however is to much of a stretch.


As for the 5.56mm NATO round, you find different bullets for different applications. There will always be arguments about which one is superior, you can't even find many experts that agree fully. However the steel penetrator in the M855 sacrificed to much fragmentation potential for penetration, and is not panning out well under practical use. The bullet does not have a high hydrostatic shock potential either, which means that without reliable yawing and fragmentation the bullet does only minor damage when compared with larger rounds. The M855A1 is being shipped off to replace the M855 for these reasons. The Mk 262 round also addresses much of these concerns but has so far really only found favor with special forces units.

The law that prohibited new automatic rifles from being sold (The Assault Weapons ban) expired in 2004.

I mean this truly, and in no way sarcastic. I got my acts mixed up, and should have checked online before actually committing anything to writing. Thanks for correcting that. Not the only mistake I committed to writing here when I wrote this at 4 am.

Edit: forget to add close one little quote tag and it messes the whole post up.

 

[mrpenguinismyhomeboy]

My school is small, so everyone knows each other. As a result, when a student dies, everyone gets pretty sad.

I didn't know said student very well, but i was surprised how by the end of the day you wouldn't have to been able to tell that anything had happened. People get over things quickly I guess?

I for one was pretty spaced out the whole day.

 

[herpaderphurr]

Well, he does live in Texas.

 

[CrazyMedic]

no offense to you or anyone here but if you didn't know him whats the big deal, I am not trying to be a troll or anything but so some mental case blows his brains out millions of people do that every day (not an exact statistic) so he does this and you get locked in a room so maybe you were bored for three hours, if he was your friend or something that is another story but if you didn't know I don't get the big deal once again not trying to troll I just wanna understand this.

As I live in Holland, weapons like that are hard to get. I haven't experienced any shootings or huge accidents, although someone did try to push me in front of a train once whilst waiting for the train. Luckily I noticed and knocked the guy over before he could push me..

America is alot more liberal with the whole firearms thing. You can buy almost any weapon from your average gun shop.

Can't say anything like this has happened anywhere near our school. Nothing much ever happens in little old New Zealand.

Yeah, I'd say I'd prefer to live anywhere but America with all the weapons and stuff... Although I guess China'd be bad too if you're too liboral. Or Korea/Thailand for that matter...
Still, I think they should ban weapons in America (yes they'll make a fuss about it being their constitutional right to bear arms and it'll take a while [read: several decades] to get nearly all weapons either destroyed or stored away, but in the end they'll see the truth, and those who don't probably never have changed anyway)

um the problem with that is mainly the thing of don't close the door once the horse has already been let out everyone has guns the only people who are gonna turn in are the people who don't want to kill people, despite being very liberal in everything else I think a 3 day waiting period for any weapon and a mandatory backround check are all the gun people need.

 

[GenericAmerican]

I have been shot at before, but anything school wise...once we thought this kid was going to bring a gun in, crazy mo-fo he was. Luckily he just quit school.

 

[jacx]

Everybody knows that thumbs can pull triggers too, right? I don't want to get into the whole gun control clusterbang, but you must really lack imagination if you can't figure out how you kill yourself with an AK.

News seems to be saying the weapon is automatic, but plenty of people, especially in the gun-control crowd, don't particularly know the difference between types of guns.

...you will have to wait 72 hours though, so you dont go out and murder soem one the day you get it.

No you don't. You walk in with money and walk out with your gun.
http://www.texasgunstore.com/education.html#FAQ1

went off florida gun laws and forgot texans want guns and they want them now

Yeah, every state's different. I think states without waiting periods may outnumber those with waiting periods. Florida has waiting periods for long guns? I've never even heard of that before. Handguns, sure, but rifles generally don't.

all guns ...you know just in case

 

[felixdan1]

me and my friend were walking home when someone robbed us and shot him in the stomach. i called an ambulance and it got there pretty quickly , and while we were at the hospital his heart stopped for 12 whole minutes. but he was fine and he came back to life.

 

[Cheery Lunatic]

EDIT: Alright, your post is confusing. So he shot up the school but didn't kill anyone and then he killed himself, or he just killed himself in public or what? Seriously, help me out here.

He fired random shots into the air, but he didn't kill anyone. He then took the gun to himself. This all took place in the library, I believe.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Lots of kids who graduated from my high school go to UT, so it has been a big deal down here. All the information I got has been due to word of mouth.

 

[Dense_Electric]

Sounds like a fun morning. Only thing like that that ever happened to me was about halfway through my sophmore year of high school, where we had about four or five bomb-threats in the span of about two weeks. Basically whoever was doing it figured out that the more bomb-threats they made, the more days we got to chill and hang out on the bleachers for three hours before we got bored and just walked off campus. It did make a pretty damn funny Facebook page, though.

http://www.facebook.com/#!/group.php?gid=10812571287&v=info&ref=ts

 

[Kuchinawa212]

I'm glad you guys are okay. With that firepower he could done some massive damage

 

[sb666]

my school went into lock down because some pissed of parent said he was going to bring a shotgun to the school

 

[Mcface]

So he got hold of a ak-47 and then shot himself with it.Wouldnt it been easier just to get hold of a handgun as you dont normally just pick up a ak-47 on the streets.

Well other than abit random at least the guy didnt try to take out half the school with him

If you are going to do it, may as well do it right, i guess.. 7.62 > 9mm

ot: my school once had 3 bomb threats in one day, and then another one the following day.

and EVERY time we went to the same field.
it's such a bad idea. Anyone could easily take out twice as many people that way..protip: put the bomb in the field.

school board didn't think that one through..