It's happening: Senator to propose bill regulating black powder in wake of Boston Massacre - Polidicks

[QUOTE=archangel125;40353259]Oh, and ksenior? Watch that video on the top of this page, and you'll see my point.[/QUOTE] I did. 7.62x54mmR is a large calibre rifle round. Large bore rifles use slow burning powders to effectively use the long barrel lengths available to them. Handguns powders burn much faster and smokeless powder when contained will burn much faster than blackpowder. Still waiting for a citation that blackpowder makes better bombs

[QUOTE=Lonestriper;40353284]But they are used in the creation of explosive devices or ammunition. Just seems like an oversight to me[/QUOTE] I guess they don't regulate it because they know that the majority of people use powder in ammunition, which is very hard, if not impossible, to track. It would be a futile effort and a waste of money.

Holy shit Glen Beck is such a fucking scumbag. He's blaming it all on the Arab guy just because. What a fucking piece of shit. oh, posted this because of the link in the OP

[QUOTE=proch;40353309]Holy shit Glen Beck is such a fucking scumbag. He's blaming it all on the Arab guy just because. What a fucking piece of shit.[/QUOTE] Wrong thread?

[QUOTE=proch;40353309]Holy shit Glen Beck is such a fucking scumbag. He's blaming it all on the Arab guy just because. What a fucking piece of shit.[/QUOTE] No shit. The guy is fucking nuts. Though this is the wrong thread

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;40353178]I wonder who will win out in the end. And then I look at all gun legislation passed since the USA was founded, look at trends of gun ownership rates, views of them by the media and popular culture, politicians, and many other things. I have a pretty good idea of which sides going to win.[/QUOTE] You know what? Rational, lightweight, well formulated, effective and largely nonrestrictive gun control is an entirely attainable goal, but all of that shit went out the window when people lost all objectivity whatsoever and the entire thing became a barking contest between the most uninformed sides of the argument. Until the very broad and complicated logistical [I]and[/I] ethical issues behind gun ownership/gun control can be dealt with using utmost objectivity, and fucking [I]ironclad[/I] statistical and scientific integrity then it simply shouldn't be addressed at all. As trivial as a lot of people perceive "gun rights" to be, nobody should stand idly-by while a group of people lazily dictates the rights of another group of people on very shaky evidence; or worse yet, pure gut feeling or knee-jerk reaction. Personally I'm not against background checks and firearm licensing, however the approach towards it recently in the united states has been lazy, pandering and sensationalistic.

[QUOTE=ksenior;40353293]I did. 7.62x54mmR is a large calibre rifle round. Large bore rifles use slow burning powders to effectively use the long barrel lengths available to them. Handguns powders burn much faster and smokeless powder when contained will burn much faster than blackpowder. Still waiting for a citation that blackpowder makes better bombs[/QUOTE] Neither make very good bombs, but black powder is often more volatile, making it preferred.

[QUOTE=DaCommie1;40353330]Neither make very good bombs, but black powder is often more volatile, making it preferred.[/QUOTE] Easier to start might do it. I'm thinking they just walked into a gunstore and said they wanted gunpowder, which is what they got. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SU1lGa1iH9E[/media] An example of smokeless being much more powerful

/pol/ was right again

[QUOTE=Riutet;40353456]/pol/ was right again[/QUOTE] No, they really, really weren't. Fuck /pol/, and fuck sensationalism.

[QUOTE=archangel125;40353473]No, they really, really weren't. Fuck /pol/, and fuck sensationalism.[/QUOTE] Reunited a confused and suicidal man with his loving family. Identified the people responsible for this bombing. Identified likely suspects for the next bombing and set them on the straight and narrow. Uncovered the false flag attempt by president Obongo and his dastardly blackwater mercs. Saved a cat from a tree. /pol/ was right again

[QUOTE=Riutet;40353495]Reunited a confused and suicidal man with his loving family. Identified the people responsible for this bombing. Identified likely suspects for the next bombing and set them on the straight and narrow. Uncovered the false flag attempt by president Obongo and his dastardly blackwater mercs. Saved a cat from a tree. /pol/ was right again[/QUOTE] If you make ten thousand wrong guesses and get a few hits in the process, it's no great achievement.

[QUOTE=archangel125;40353522]If you make ten thousand wrong guesses and get a few hits in the process, it's no great achievement.[/QUOTE] Do you hate freedom?

Banning black powder would have prevented the Boston Massacre. How would the redcoats have fired their weapons? I, for one, support a ban on black powder to prevent such tragedies in the future.

This is fucking retarded, you dont even need black powder to make explosives, the Oklahoma bombing, for example, was a U-haul filled with plant fertilizer and diesel fuel. Better ban those too.

[QUOTE=Riutet;40353533]Do you hate freedom?[/QUOTE] stop shitposting

[QUOTE=SpaceGhost;40353570]This is fucking retarded, you dont even need black powder to make explosives, the Oklahoma bombing, for example, was a U-haul filled with plant fertilizer and diesel fuel. Better ban those too.[/QUOTE] I don't think you see many people selling ANFO to individuals though

[QUOTE=SpaceGhost;40353570]This is fucking retarded, you dont even need black powder to make explosives, the Oklahoma bombing, for example, was a U-haul filled with plant fertilizer and diesel fuel. Better ban those too.[/QUOTE] Well to be perfectly clear the fertilizer used was ammonium nitrate, which is pretty well regulated.

[QUOTE=Lonestriper;40353586]I don't think you see many people selling ANFO to individuals though[/QUOTE] Pre 9/11 Ammonium Nitrate was ridiculously easy to get. These days only farmers can get it but most do an it's not exactly hard to steal it. They wouldn't notice a few 20kg bags of the stuff missing out of the 10 tonnes or more of the stuff they have If the Boston bombers had used it the death tolls would have been much higher

[QUOTE=ksenior;40353814]Pre 9/11 Ammonium Nitrate was ridiculously easy to get. These days only farmers can get it but most do an it's not exactly hard to steal it. They wouldn't notice a few 20kg bags of the stuff missing out of the 10 tonnes or more of the stuff they have If the Boston bombers had used it the death tolls would have been much higher[/QUOTE] If the Boston bombers had done it "properly" they'd probably have had a few thusand small ball bearings caked in glue and a kilo or two of C4 in the center There wouldent be a standing person on the whole fucking street [editline]20th April 2013[/editline] Its not like RDX (main component of C4) is hard to make either, you can derive it from hexamine fuel tablets easily which they could probably steal enough of

[QUOTE=Tobba;40353868]If the Boston bombers had done it "properly" they'd probably have had a few thusand small ball bearings caked in glue with 1kg of C4 in the center There wouldent be a standing person on the whole street[/QUOTE] Realistically I don't think that there isn't much they could have done to increase the death toll without increasing the size of the explosive. They might have managed a few more people, but explosives aren't magic and are very much constrained by the laws of physics. An open area with a dense group of people means that a shrapnel based explosive would only harm the people directly adjacent to it. The additional velocity that might be provided by a brick of C4 would be negligible, as the bomb did precisely what it was supposed to do and delivered shrapnel to everyone next to it. A pressure cooker filled with nails and black powder is simple, but effective.

[QUOTE=GunFox;40353899]Realistically I don't think that there isn't much they could have done to increase the death toll without increasing the size of the explosive. They might have managed a few more people, but explosives aren't magic and are very much constrained by the laws of physics. An open area with a dense group of people means that a shrapnel based explosive would only harm the people directly adjacent to it. The additional velocity that might be provided by a brick of C4 would be negligible, as the bomb did precisely what it was supposed to do and delivered shrapnel to everyone next to it. A pressure cooker filled with nails and black powder is simple, but effective.[/QUOTE] A ball bearing fired away by C4 could easily tear through atleast two guys before getting stopped, their bomb was horseshit, the sharapnel amounts were suboptimal and they probably only got a fifth of the velocity you'd want

[QUOTE=Tobba;40353916]A ball bearing fired away by C4 could easily tear through atleast two guys before getting stopped, their bomb was horseshit, the sharapnel amounts were suboptimal and they probably only got a fifth of the velocity you'd want[/QUOTE] wow yeah fuck those idiots for making a shit bomb! THEY COULD HAVE DONE WAY BETTER I WOULD HAVE DONE WAY BETTER AND KILLED MORE PEOPLE

[QUOTE=johnsten;40353931]wow yeah fuck those idiots for making a shit bomb! THEY COULD HAVE DONE WAY BETTER I WOULD HAVE DONE WAY BETTER AND KILLED MORE PEOPLE[/QUOTE] Its a bit pathetic how these guys packed a fifth of the punch they could have and people are calling for banning the weak stuff If they regulate gunpowder everyone will just have to turn to more high powered explosives anyways

[QUOTE=GunFox;40353899]Realistically I don't think that there isn't much they could have done to increase the death toll without increasing the size of the explosive. They might have managed a few more people, but explosives aren't magic and are very much constrained by the laws of physics. An open area with a dense group of people means that a shrapnel based explosive would only harm the people directly adjacent to it. The additional velocity that might be provided by a brick of C4 would be negligible, as the bomb did precisely what it was supposed to do and delivered shrapnel to everyone next to it. A pressure cooker filled with nails and black powder is simple, but effective.[/QUOTE] Blackpowder has a RE (relative effectiveness) Factor of 0.5 that of TNT and a detonation velocity of 600ms^-1. ANFO has an RE of 0.74 and a detonation velocity of 4.5kms^-1 For comparison, RDX, the main component of C4 has an RE of 1.6 and a detonation velocity of 8.7kms^-1 That's a big big difference

This is pointless, you can make a bomb with completely harmless household items

[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;40352673]It seems like we always have scumbag politicians trying to push their agendas in wake of tragedies.[/QUOTE] Please stop this lazy and asinine emotional pandering. Not just you, but everyone who feels the need to throw politicians under a bus just because they dare to offer legislation on things no matter how insipid. [editline]20th April 2013[/editline] Good news for the black powder enthusiasts/conspiracy theorists out there though because this has a snowballs chance in hell of passing.

[QUOTE=ksenior;40354020]Blackpowder has a RE (relative effectiveness) Factor of 0.5 that of TNT and a detonation velocity of 600ms^-1. ANFO has an RE of 0.74 and a detonation velocity of 4.5kms^-1 For comparison, RDX, the main component of C4 has an RE of 1.6 and a detonation velocity of 8.7kms^-1 That's a big big difference[/QUOTE]This, children, is why fast explosives like C4 would not work well in a pressure-dependent bomb, and it's the reason why mines use ANFO which provides a nice trade-off between the "push" and "cut" elements of an explosion. Simple rule of thumb is, the slow explosives will life a tree stump, fast ones will turn it into toothpicks. [editline]20th April 2013[/editline] And yes, I am well aware that all explosive weapons rely on pressure but you get what I mean. A block of C4 sitting in a pressure cooker won't be contained at all.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;40354796]Please stop this lazy and asinine emotional pandering. Not just you, but everyone who feels the need to throw politicians under a bus just because they dare to offer legislation on things no matter how insipid. [/QUOTE] You say this to someone who is pointing out its the politicians that are emotionally pandering after a crisis. Politicians who are offering nothing more then useless, quick fix legislation which does more harm then good.

[QUOTE=H8Entitlement;40354958]You say this to someone who is pointing out its the politicians that are emotionally pandering after a crisis. Politicians who are offering nothing more then useless, quick fix legislation which does more harm then good.[/QUOTE] How is it emotional at all to offer legislation for background checks on selling a type of explosive that was recently used in a bombing? "Hey, this thing was used to hurt people, maybe we should look into making sure the people who are buying it are legit". It's not banning it, it's not even strictly regulating it, just making sure the people who buy it aren't criminals. Personally I'm split between not thinking it's really necessary (black powder as an explosive is used so little often to commit crimes that it's not even worth talking about) but on the other hand I can't see much going wrong with simply requiring a background check to buy an explosive. So I'm neutral. But atleast I am discussing the topic rather than out of hand dismissing it under the guise of being on a moral pedestal. When is the right time to talk about legislation involving something has killed people? A week? A month? A year?