Glocks and Duckfaces: Americans flaunt their new firearms on Instagram and Twitter. - Polidicks

Wow, this topic (not perhaps the thread) is the most infected one I've seen on facepunch, ever.

[QUOTE=cccritical;38986773][b]both of those weapons have killed countless more humans than guns ever have[/b], and, like guns, they're now used for recreational sports: all three are featured in the olympic games, played with variants designed specifically for competition and not slaughter[/QUOTE] You're joking right? Right?

[QUOTE=Falubii;38989912]You're joking right? Right?[/QUOTE] are you?

When wars were fought with spears and bows the human population was far smaller. I wouldn't be surprised if more people died in WWII by guns then the collective death toll of all history from spears.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;38987890]Even more ridiculous is: [img]http://www.kitsune.addr.com/Firearms/Auto-Rifles/M-1_Carbine.jpg[/img] The top is legal, the bottom is illegal. They are functionally identical in every way. The M1A1 is just a Paratrooper version of the M1, with a folding stock, and pistol grip.[/QUOTE] The M1A1 is illegal? Wat. I have one of those. (historical)

snip

[QUOTE=aydin690;38989102]I don't recall owning something that's designed to kill.[/QUOTE] you don't have a single kitchen knife or other cutting tool anywhere in your household? [QUOTE=Falubii;38989912]You're joking right? Right?[/QUOTE] the roman kingdom lasted from 753 bc to 509 bc, the roman republic until 27 bc, and the roman empire stretched all the way until 1453 ad that's 2206 years, laced with something like 80 wars, every one of them fought with swords, spears and bows england had about 30 wars occuring before the 1600s, fought with swords, spears and bows, and occasionally maybe a cannon france had 82 or so wars in the same time frame, and again, they were fought with swords, spears and bows, and occasionally maybe a cannon just between these three countries/empires/whatever I count 192 full-blown wars, which is kind of a shitload in terms of human loss of life, so you can probably imagine what the total might come to if I also begin counting germany, spain, italy, hungary, turkey, poland, norway, sweden, russia, etc

[QUOTE=Broseph_;38989573]Except the original AR-15 was fully automatic and chambered in .222 Remington Magnum rendering your lazy attempt at a counterpoint moot.[/QUOTE] Implying that .222 in. does not in fact equal 5.56mm. Note that it [B]does not[/B] say "5.56x45mm NATO"

[QUOTE=Apache249;38992172]Implying that .222 in. does not in fact equal 5.56mm."[/QUOTE] It doesn't..... Look it up, .222 remington is not the same as .223

[QUOTE=Perfumly;38991718]The M1A1 is illegal? Wat. I have one of those. (historical)[/QUOTE] It was probably grandfathered/pre-ban.

[QUOTE=Falubii;38989987]When wars were fought with spears and bows the human population was far smaller. I wouldn't be surprised if more people died in WWII by guns then the collective death toll of all history from spears.[/QUOTE] Fuck all people died in WWII from guns Guns are actually really inefficient mass murder tools contrary to popular belief, people are really bad at shooting things accurately especially when the people they are trying to shoot are shooting back at them. People got fucked up primarily by artillery, mortars and planes

[QUOTE=aydin690;38989102]I don't recall owning something that's designed to kill.[/QUOTE] every time one of you nits says this it doesn't make your point any more valid fyi [editline]27th December 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Falubii;38989912]You're joking right? Right?[/QUOTE] you might wanna do some research

Who actually gives a fuck

no arguing with that logic case closed /thread

[QUOTE=JaegerMonster;38992378]It doesn't..... Look it up, .222 remington is not the same as .223[/QUOTE] I never said it's the same. It doesn't take half a brain to figure out that they're different cartridges. The bullets have the same diameter.

[QUOTE=Killuah;38985653]Yes I need 1200 bullets for my collection.[/QUOTE] Clearly you have no idea how much ammo you can go though at one range trip. You an easily go though 500 rounds in one trip alone.

psh, guns i'd buy a tank

[QUOTE=Apache249;38992848]I never said it's the same. It doesn't take half a brain to figure out that they're different cartridges. The bullets have the same diameter.[/QUOTE] 5.56 (actually 5.7mm because NATO can't measure anything) is about 35 hundredths of an inch larger. The projectiles are incompatible when handloading

[QUOTE=rampageturke 2;38993028]psh, guns i'd buy a tank[/QUOTE] and now you can [img]http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/01/14/article-0-0CC19B52000005DC-846_634x542.jpg[/img] isn't it disgusting that this man has ready access to a [i]tank?[/i] you know, the nazis used tanks frequently to kill brits and the french, we really should just get rid of everything classified as a tank [sp]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1347133/Disabled-man-banned-using-road-tank-wheelchair-killjoy-DVLA-chiefs.html[/sp]

[QUOTE=Broseph_;38988913]Technically both are illegal because of the 15 round magazine. That aside, under the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 the Bottom if you took a grinder to the bayonet lug it would be legal because the stock connects to the bottom of the grip so legally it doesn't count as a Pistol Grip, and you're allowed to have one feature that would otherwise make it illegal, so you can have the folding stock.[/QUOTE] The legislation is [I]that[/I]f ucking bad that that doesn't even count as a pistol grip? What the fuck?

[QUOTE=cccritical;38993344]and now you can [img]http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/01/14/article-0-0CC19B52000005DC-846_634x542.jpg[/img] isn't it disgusting that this man has ready access to a [i]tank?[/i] you know, the nazis used tanks frequently to kill brits and the french, we really should just get rid of everything classified as a tank [sp]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1347133/Disabled-man-banned-using-road-tank-wheelchair-killjoy-DVLA-chiefs.html[/sp][/QUOTE] i was thinking more along the lines of this tank [url]http://www.milweb.net/webverts/62633/[/url]

[QUOTE=Kasuga Ayumu;38993044]5.56 (actually 5.7mm because NATO can't measure anything) is about 35 hundredths of an inch larger. The projectiles are incompatible when handloading[/QUOTE] .222 Remington Magnum is also 5.7mm. I'm not saying they're compatible, but they are the same size.

[QUOTE=Apache249;38994200].222 Remington Magnum is also 5.7mm. I'm not saying they're compatible, but they are the same size.[/QUOTE] The grooves in the rifling are 5.7mm in 222 rem mag, the projectile is a different size

[QUOTE=nick_9_8;38985399]In Australia, all guns are illegial, so could someone explain to me the logical reasons of owning an assault rifle? Because frankly, I don't see the point. If you reallllly wanted defense wouldn't you buy a pistol? Why would you need a gun that shoots 40 bullets in one mag...[/QUOTE] Aren't you cool! [editline]27th December 2012[/editline] Wow shit I'm late as hell and this thread is already a shit storm. Away I go!

[QUOTE=Broseph_;38989119]Since when did rechambering a firearm make it cease being what it was? That's like saying a C96 isn't a C96 because it's chambered in 9mm instead of .30 Mauser[/QUOTE] The AR-15 rifle has only ever been produced in 5.56/.223. Armalite made them and then colt. Other rifles may be based off the AR-15 platform, but they are not actually AR-15's. Banning .223 for hunting does effectively ban AR-15 rifles. The C96, on the other hand, was officially manufactured under a variety of calibers.

[QUOTE=JustGman;38985410]because they're cool[/QUOTE] Nothing is sexier than an M4 carbine

[QUOTE=Apache249;38992172]Implying that .222 in. does not in fact equal 5.56mm. Note that it [B]does not[/B] say "5.56x45mm NATO"[/QUOTE] Except the metric dimensions of the .222 Remington Magnum is 5.7x47mm [IMG]http://www.1337upload.net/files/222_rem_mag_223_rem.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=GunFox;38995691]The AR-15 rifle has only ever been produced in 5.56/.223. Armalite made them and then colt. Other rifles may be based off the AR-15 platform, but they are not actually AR-15's. Banning .223 for hunting does effectively ban AR-15 rifles. The C96, on the other hand, was officially manufactured under a variety of calibers.[/QUOTE] What if it's a normal AR-15 lower receiver with a 7.62x39/5.45x39/9mm upper receiver? Is it no longer an AR-15. that honestly doesn't seem right.

[QUOTE=GunFox;38995691]The AR-15 rifle has only ever been produced in 5.56/.223. Armalite made them and then colt. Other rifles may be based off the AR-15 platform, but they are not actually AR-15's. Banning .223 for hunting does effectively ban AR-15 rifles. The C96, on the other hand, was officially manufactured under a variety of calibers.[/QUOTE] Again, this is incorrect as the very first AR-15s made in 1958 were chambered in .222 Remington magnum, and Colt offers AR-15s chambered in 9mm

[QUOTE=GunFox;38995691]The AR-15 rifle has only ever been produced in 5.56/.223. Armalite made them and then colt. Other rifles may be based off the AR-15 platform, but they are not actually AR-15's. Banning .223 for hunting does effectively ban AR-15 rifles. The C96, on the other hand, was officially manufactured under a variety of calibers.[/QUOTE] armalite and colt both make them in .300BLK, 7.62x39, and 6.8 Spc [editline]27th December 2012[/editline] And colt makes them in 9mm and Armalite makes them in .308